By Jeff Foust on 2012 September 2 at 9:18 am ET At first glance, it might appear that space policy got a lot of attention in the last week: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney mentioned the late Neil Armstrong in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on Thursday night, and did so again during a campaign stop on Saturday in Cincinnati, a day after the Apollo 11 astronaut’s funeral there. The Republican Party platform, approved during the convention, included a plank about space. Meanwhile, while the Republicans convened in Tampa, President Barack Obama found a very different outlet to discuss policy issues, an “Ask Me Anything” discussion on the popular website Reddit, where he answered one question on space policy.
So, that should be good news for those who follow space policy, right? Not really. None of these comments said much of anything new—or even much of anything at all—about the candidates’ positions on space policy. The fact that we’re paying so much attention to such minor comments indicates how little the candidates, in particular Romney, have said on space, especially in comparison to just four years ago.
The highest-profile mention of space came Thursday night, when Romney gave his acceptance speech at the convention in Tampa. He mentioned in his address Neil Armstrong, but only to reflect on this significance of Armsrong’s accomplishments and not mentioning either the current administration’s space policy or what a Romney Administration might do differently:
I was born in the middle of the century in the middle of the country, a classic baby boomer. It was a time when Americans were returning from war and eager to work. To be an American was to assume that all things were possible. When President Kennedy challenged Americans to go to the moon, the question wasn’t whether we’d get there, it was only when we’d get there.
The soles of Neil Armstrong’s boots on the moon made permanent impressions on OUR souls and in our national psyche. Ann and I watched those steps together on her parent’s sofa. Like all Americans we went to bed that night knowing we lived in the greatest country in the history of the world.
God bless Neil Armstrong.
Tonight that American flag is still there on the moon. And I don’t doubt for a second that Neil Armstrong’s spirit is still with us: that unique blend of optimism, humility and the utter confidence that when the world needs someone to do the really big stuff, you need an American.
On Saturday, his reference to Armstrong in Cincinnati was even shorter, effectively doing little more than namechecking him: “I will do everything in my power to bring us together, because united, America built the strongest economy in the history of the earth. United, we put Neil Armstrong on the moon.”
As for the reference to space in the GOP platform, the two paragraphs about space said very little, describing only the benefits of spaceflight and, in the most general of language, what (if anything) the US should be doing differently:
America’s Future in Space: Continuing this Quest
The exploration of space has been a key part of U.S. global leadership and has supported innovation and ownership of technology. Over the last half-century, in partnership with our aerospace industry, the work of NASA has helped define and strengthen our nation’s technological prowess. From building the world’s most powerful rockets to landing men on the Moon, sending robotic spacecraft throughout our solar system and beyond, building the International Space Station, and launching space-based telescopes that allow scientists to better understand our universe, NASA science and engineering have produced spectacular results. The technologies that emerged from those programs propelled our aerospace industrial base and directly benefit our national security, safety, economy, and quality of life. Through its achievements, NASA has inspired generations of Americans to study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, leading to careers that drive our country’s technological and economic engines.
Today, America’s leadership in space is challenged by countries eager to emulate – and surpass – NASA’s accomplishments. To preserve our national security interests and foster innovation and competitiveness, we must sustain our preeminence in space, launching more science missions, guaranteeing unfettered access, and maintaining a source of high-value American jobs.
The first paragraph only describes the varied benefits of space exploration, while the second offers virtually nothing in the way of specifics. The closest break to the current administration’s policy is the call for “more science missions”, but how many more, and of what kind? There’s also no reference to human spaceflight, including the retirement of the Space Shuttle, cancellation of Constellation, or anything else. In addition, while the space program, in particular human spaceflight, is often claimed to be something that sets the US apart from other nations, the plank was not included in the platform’s “American Exceptionalism” section, but instead near the end of “Reforming Government to Serve the People”, although there’s really nothing in the way of reform in that platform language regarding space.
Then there’s Obama’s participation in the Reddit AMA session. Much of that interest was devoted to the novelty of the event, including the fact that Obama himself was writing the answers (the White House released a photo of him typing away on a MacBook Pro, his tie loosened and sleeves rolled up.) Given the Reddit audience skews strongly towards people with an interest in technology, it’s not surprising someone asked, “Are you considering increasing funds to the space program?” Obama’s answer, though, didn’t address the point of the question:
Making sure we stay at the forefront of space exploration is a big priority for my administration. The passing of Neil Armstrong this week is a reminder of the inspiration and wonder that our space program has provided in the past; the curiosity probe on mars is a reminder of what remains to be discovered. The key is to make sure that we invest in cutting edge research that can take us to the next level – so even as we continue work with the international space station, we are focused on a potential mission to a asteroid as a prelude to a manned Mars flight.
That was simply a reiteration of some of the general points of his space exploration policy, including the goals of human missions to an asteroid and to Mars as well as increased investment in technology development. He said nothing, though, about the size of NASA’s budget.
This limited attention the campaigns are playing to space is a sharp contrast to 2008. By this point (the beginning of September) in the 2008 campaign, the Obama campaign had released a detailed space policy white paper, just a few days after the John McCain campaign released its own policy paper. At that time, neither was the incumbent, nor had either built up much of a record on the topic in the Senate. Four years later, the Obama Administration does have a policy to run on, if they so choose, but Romney’s comments are little more than vague statements to date, such as his January speech in Florida where he talked about how to develop a mission for NASA rather than articulate what that mission should be.
So why is that the case? In an article published Friday evening by the Orlando Sentinel, former congressman Bob Walker suggested that internal conflicts within the Romney campaign might be preventing it from providing a more detailed policy. “I think the civil war has kept any one faction from dominating the discussion inside the Romney advisory group,” Walker said, referring to the campaign’s space policy advisory group announced in January.
Or, it may be that, contrary to the wishes of space advocates and enthusiasts, space just isn’t that important an issue. The presidential campaign is largely revolving around the economy: are you better off that you were four years ago? Space is lost in the shadow of that debate, even in a swing state like Florida where, at least in the state’s Space Coast region, people think and care more about space policy than most of the rest of the country. That seems unlikely to change in the final two months of the campaign.
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 25 at 8:17 pm ET On Saturday afternoon, the family of Neil Armstrong announced that the famous astronaut had passed away at the age of 82 after complications from heart surgery he had earlier this month. Within a few hours there was an outpouring of reaction to the death of the first man to walk on the Moon, including official statements from President Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
“Neil was among the greatest of American heroes – not just of his time, but of all time,” said President Obama in a White House statement. “Today, Neil’s spirit of discovery lives on in all the men and women who have devoted their lives to exploring the unknown – including those who are ensuring that we reach higher and go further in space. That legacy will endure – sparked by a man who taught us the enormous power of one small step.”
Obama summarized that sentiment in a tweet from his campaign account, @BarackObama; the “-bo” indicates the tweet was written by Obama himself:
Gov. Romney also issued a statement from his campaign mourning Armstrong’s passing. “Neil Armstrong today takes his place in the hall of heroes. With courage unmeasured and unbounded love for his country, he walked where man had never walked before. The moon will miss its first son of earth.” Romney added that he “met and spoke” with Armstrong just a few weeks ago, although he does not mention the subject of that conversation.
Romney also provided a brief summary of his statement via Twitter:
In Congress, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) issued a brief statement. “A true hero has returned to the Heavens to which he once flew,” he said. “Ohio has lost one of her proudest sons. Humanity has gained a legend.”
On Facebook, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) posted a brief note about the death of Armstrong. “He will always be remembered as one of the most iconic pioneers of the NASA community – dedicated to the team that helped him achieve glory for us all,” she wrote.
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) also provided a brief comment in a statement via the Miami Herald. “Neil Armstrong understood that we should reach beyond the stars. His ‘one giant leap for mankind’ was taken by a giant of a man.”
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) also expressed his condolences in a statement while taking a bigger-picture view. “America, the space community and the entire world have lost a courageous pioneer. One needs to look no further than the various foreign currencies in the donation box at Washington’s National Air and Space Museum to understand what our space program means not only for our country but for all of humanity.”
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 22 at 1:38 pm ET [ Apologies for the lack of posts recently, a combination of travel, a heavy workload, and illness. ]
In his first stint as governor of California in the 1970s, Jerry Brown earned the sobriquet “Governor Moonbeam” in part for his interest in space topics, including a proposal that California have its own satellite to support emergency communications in the state. That proposal never became reality, and that moniker faded away. However, that interest in space shines through a bit as Brown, back in Sacramento as governor, signed a proclamation declaring Wednesday to be “Space Day” in the state. The proclamation cites both the general benefits of spaceflight, including uniting “all of humanity in a shared sense of curiosity, hope and wonderment” as well as the successful landing on Mars of the Curiosity rover, led by the team at JPL in Pasadena. Brown is scheduled to be at JPL today to meet the Mars Science Laboratory team and tour the lab. If this landing has rekindled any latent interest the governor has in space, local space advocates might want to take advantage of this to discuss what the state government can do to support the state’s space industry and workforce…
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 15 at 8:41 am ET Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), one of the strongest NASA advocates in Congress, now officially knows who he’ll have to beat in order to secure a third term in the Senate. Rep. Connie Mack IV (R-FL) easily won the Republican primary for the Senate seat on Tuesday and will face off against Nelson in November in what polls currently suggest to be a tight race. Mack, son of a former senator, easily beat out a familar name in space policy circles: former congressman Dave Weldon, who represented Florida’s Space Coast in the House from 1994 through 2008 (a seat now held by fellow Republican Bill Posey.) Mack’s campaign web site is silent on space (and many other specific policy issues), but does describe his “Mack Penny Plan” that would cut federal spending across the board by one percent per year for six years.
Another member of Congress who has been vocal on space issues won’t be returning next year. In a member-versus-member primary created by redistricting, Rep. John Mica (R-FL) beat Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) by 20 percentage points. Adams’s current district includes part of the Space Coast, including KSC (the rest, including Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, is in Posey’s district), but redistricting put her in territory away from the Space Coast and in the heart of longtime member Mica’s district.
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 14 at 7:45 am ET On Monday, President Obama made a congratulatory phone call to members of the Mars Science Laboratory team at JPL, thanking them for their work successfully landing the Curiosity rover on Mars. The eight-minute call was a fairly basic speech thanking the JPL team and its partners for the mission, with the now-obligatory mention of flight director Bobak Ferdowsi’s mohawk. It was, though, according to one source, only the third time a sitting president made a congratulatory call to JPL regarding a robotic mission achievement: Gerald Ford callled in 1976 for the Viking missions and George W. Bush called in 2004 after the landing of the Mars rover Spirit.
“You guys are examples of American know-how and ingenuity, and it’s really an amazing accomplishment,” the President said late in the call. “I’m going to give you guys a personal commitment to protect these critical investments in science and technology.” Left unmentioned, though, is the 20-percent cut in NASA’s planetary sciences program in his fiscal year 2013 budget proposal and a decision to back out of the joint ExoMars program with Europe.
President Obama’s Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, also worked in a mention of the Curiosity rover landing during a campaign stop in St. Augustine, Florida. “You also just saw we just landed on Mars and took a good look at what’s going on there,” he said, using the landing, as well as the US’s performance at the Olympics, as evidence that the America was still the greatest nation in the world. “And I know the Chinese are planning on going to the Moon, and I hope they have a good experience doing that. And I hope they stop in and take a look at our flag that was put there 43 years ago.”
The comment about China’s lunar plans recalls a statement Romney made nearly six months ago, one of the last times he mentioned space on the campaign trail. Speaking in Kalamazoo, Michigan, Romney was dismissive of claims that China was planning a human mission to the Moon. “It’s like, guys, we were there a long time ago, all right?” he said at the time. “And when you get there would you bring back some of the stuff we left?” Romney’s comments indicate he does not appear to be any more concerned about those plans now.
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 14 at 7:25 am ET [Update: Nick Eftimiades contacted me earlier today and said he had a case of mistaken identity: it was not Rep. Ryan who was in attendance at the dinner he recalled in his now-deleted blog post, as it turns out. He—and I—regret the error.]
As previously discussed here, Mitt Romney’s choice of running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), doesn’t have much of a space policy background: a couple of votes on space-related bills over the years, plus his budget plan that would cut spending on science and space. However, Nicholas Eftimiades, a former National Security Space Office (NSSO) official, offers a different perspective on Ryan. In a blog post yesterday, he recalls being at a dinner with Ryan, Buzz Aldrin, and several other members of Congress to discuss space policy and STEM education. “Myself and Buzz Aldrin did the lion’s share of talking that evening. Congressman Ryan carefully listened to our respective visions of a space program for America,” he recalls. “He asked how, from a legislative perspective, the Congress could make the space program better. He showed no hint of partisan politics, was very thoughtful, and focused on positive change for the US space program.”
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 11 at 11:15 am ET Early this morning, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney announced his choice for running mate: Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). While the decision may, as the Washington Post article linked to above suggests, offer a “stark choice” on fiscal issues, it sheds little, if any light, on the niche issue of space policy. Ryan has said virtually nothing on space issues, and it’s not a local issue in his southeast Wisconsin district. His House web site is virtually devoid of references to NASA, beyond a link on his “Students and Kids” page to the “NASA Kids’ Club” site.
In terms of recent roll-call votes, he did vote against the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 in September 2010, legislation that did pass the House and was signed into law.
Ryan is better known as chairman of the House Budget Committee, and in that role he has offered budget proposals that included sigificant cuts in non-defense discretionary spending. The Ryan budget does not go down into the details about specific agencies, like NASA, but instead is at the “account” level, which can cut across not only the usual divisions of the appropriations process but also across agencies. As SpacePolicyOnline.com noted earlier this year, most of NASA, as well as NOAA, are accounted for within account 250, “General science, space, and technology”, but NASA’s aeronautics program is part of account 400, “Transportation”.
What the Ryan budget does show is a modest decrease in science and space spending in his budget. His ten-year (fiscal years 2013-2022) budget would spend about 6.5 percent less on that account versus the administration’s own ten-year budget, which you can compare by looking at the charts at the end of the House budget resolution with this table from the Office of Management and Budget. (This Excel file compares the two budgets on that one particular account.) This doesn’t necessarily mean he would cut NASA’s budget by this amount: he could choose to spare it and cut other programs by a correspondingly greater amount, or vice versa. And, of course, it doesn’t mean that a Romney Administration would necessarily adopt something like this in its budgets for FY2014 and beyond.
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 10 at 6:31 am ET There was a tremendous public reaction to Sunday night’s successful landing by NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory mission, and the Curiosity rover is in good health as project scientists and engineers check out the rover and its scientific instruments. Some have wondered if the public’s interest in the mission will translate into additional funding for NASA and, in particular, its Mars exploration program, which suffered significant cuts in the administration’s fiscal year 2013 budget proposal. For the moment, though, there’s little evidence of that.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who spoke out about the Mars program prior to the Curiosity landing, mentioned his desire to increase to restore Mars program funding in a statement after the landing. “This success must reinvigorate our efforts to restore funding for planetary science and future Mars missions,” he stated. “While we have restored some of the funding — almost $100 million so far — much work remains to return the Mars Program to health.”
While several other members also expressed congratulations for the sucessful landing, they didn’t echo his call for increased funding. “The soft landing of the Curiosity rover on Mars is a testament to NASA’s engineering superiority. More importantly, it serves as the most recent and best example of why it is so important for us to continue to invest in deep space exploration,” said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), in a statement that came closest to supporting Schiff’s call. Both the chairman of the House Scienc Committee, Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX) and Democratic committee leaders Reps. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) and Jerry Costello (D-IL) congratulated NASA for the landing but said little more.
The landing also prompted a statement from President Obama, who called the landing “an unprecedented feat of technology that will stand as a point of national pride far into the future.” The statement was as much about NASA’s overall direction, though, as about the landing, also citing NASA’s commercial crew program and the importance in investing in science and technology research. In a press briefing Monday, a reported asked White House press secretary Jay Carney if the president had seen the initial images returned by the rover. “I didn’t ask him,” Carney responded, then mentioned the statement from the president. “But I haven’t talked to him about whether he’s seen these images. It really is quite remarkable.”
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 5 at 7:59 pm ET Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), whose current district includes JPL and Pasadena, has been a strong advocate for NASA’s planetary science program and, specifically, Mars exploration. On Saturday, he reiterated his desire to see to reverse cuts to those programs while also pushing for better goals for the nation’s space program.
“We have too long drifted without a strategic vision for space that can survive changes of administration as well as congressional appropriations cycles,” Schiff told attendees of the International Mars Society Convention in Pasadena. “Now, as we prepare to celebrate Curiosity’s arrival on Mars, we face the urgent need to set new goals and reinvigorate the space program.”
Schiff said he believes a logical long-term goal for NASA’s exploration efforts is Mars. He said he thinks the Mars Program Planning Group, commissioned by NASA earlier this year to review NASA’s Mars strategy, will recommend a path that calls for a human landing on Mars by the 2030s, a decade before a sample return mission. He called on attendees to petition their congressional representatives “for an increase in NASA’s budget as well as a national commitment to lead an effort to put humans on Mars by a date certain. Without persistence and clarity, we will continue to drift.”
Taking a more tactical approach, Schiff asked convention attendees to continue efforts to restore NASA’s planetary science budget, which have met with some success in the reduced cuts in the appropriations bills working through the House and Senate. “We still have a long way to go, and it is my hope that as we go to conference—if we go to conference—we can increase those numbers further,” he said. He warned, though, that the recent deal for a six-month continuing resolution could include some across-the-board budget cuts. “The impact on Mars will depend on how NASA allocates funds in its operating plans,” which in turn depends on guidance it receives from OMB.
“The immediate future is murky, and we need your help,” he said, suggesting that NASA was surprised by the reaction to the planned cuts since their announcement in February. “The only thing that has rescued us from the severity of what the administration proposed was the fact that planetary scientists like you have been making their voices heard and loudly,” he said. (Most of the audience of the Mars Society conference are better classified as enthusiasts and activists than as scientists, though.) “And I think frankly it has astounded the administration that you have spoken with such boldness and clarity.”
Schiff said he believes Mars was targeted for cuts because the administration thought there would be, at best, a muted reaction and little opposition. “They have been astounded by the fury of the pushback, and that is the only thing that has saved us so far.”
By Jeff Foust on 2012 August 5 at 3:30 pm ET A day after NASA announced the winners of awards in the next round of its commercial crew program, the Florida campaign of President Barack Obama used the news to contrast the administration’s space policy with that of his opponent, Gov. Mitt Romney.
“As Floridians have seen President Obama’s continued commitment on moving our nation’s space program forward, Mitt Romney refuses to answer even the most basic questions surrounding space policy,” Eric Jotkoff of Obama for America-Florida said in the statement, using the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) awards as evidence of continued progress on the administration’s space policy. “He won’t say if he supports President Obama’s efforts to support and grow America’s commercial space industry, and as each day passes, it becomes increasingly clear that Mitt Romney has no clear vision for NASA.”
The Romney campaign has kept a low profile on space issues since the Florida primary at the end of January. At that time Romney declined to articulate a specific vision for NASA or space policy in general, saying he would convene a panel of experts from across the field to study the best direction for NASA.
|
|
