Author Topic: Impact of Republican Control of Both the House and Senate on Space Policy?  (Read 66587 times)

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
I disagree. NASA wouldn't get the budget that it gets if it wasn't dominated by Florida and Texas politicians.

One interpretation of that though, is that we wouldn't be wasting so much money on "certain programs" if not for "certain politicians".

I for one am perfectly fine with NASA being funded because of the goals it's asked to meet, not the jobs it provides.  If that means less money at different times, then so be it.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
The GAO is fairly neutral and are generally supportive of NASA.

You can't be neutral and supportive at the same time.  I see them as just neutral.

I meant supportive in the sense that the GAO won't criticize NASA for the fun of it. For example, your comment can be seen as either nitpicking or detailed oriented. Both are true but one is supportive and the other one isn't...
« Last Edit: 09/03/2015 11:13 pm by yg1968 »

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Just as a side note: The President looks after the interest of the United States while Representatives primary concern is the state they represent... So those folks are just doing their job whether we like it or not...
I agree that is what they do. Their job, however, is to propose and enact policies that benefit the nation. In the case of NASA, forcing the agency to continue to spend a large part of its budget on a launch system that is, as far as I can tell, too expensive to apply to any practical goal does not advance the national interests or even the exploration of space.
When the nation becomes their primary concern, thats when they decide to run for President...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
I disagree. NASA wouldn't get the budget that it gets if it wasn't dominated by Florida and Texas politicians.

One interpretation of that though, is that we wouldn't be wasting so much money on "certain programs" if not for "certain politicians".

I for one am perfectly fine with NASA being funded because of the goals it's asked to meet, not the jobs it provides.  If that means less money at different times, then so be it.

Or you might get a space program that focuses only on robotic exploration because most politicians believe that human exploration is too expensive and there are other more important needs than space. I don't agree with that statement but that is the reason that human exploration isn't pursued in many other countries.
« Last Edit: 09/04/2015 12:53 am by yg1968 »

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
Or you might get a space program that focuses only on robotic exploration because most politicians believe that human exploration is too expensive and there are other more important needs than space.

And that may happen once the ISS is decommissioned, since I think the SLS program will be closed down prior to 2024 for lack of need, and there are currently no funded programs that require humans in space except for supporting the ISS.

Quote
I don't agree with that statement but that is the reason that human exploration isn't pursued in many other countries.

If you examine the history of our space program and the major parts of it (i.e. Apollo, Shuttle and ISS), they were created for political needs, not purely for "human space exploration".  We don't have a big political need that can be solved by sending humans out into space at this moment in history.

Also, the government doing something can suppress the private sector from getting involved for their own reasons.  For example, while the Shuttle program was active there was little incentive to build a commercial crew transportation system, since the U.S. Government provided rides to space for free.

Maybe not having our government in space with humans will inspire the commercial sector or private individuals to create a need for new activities in space with humans?  I'm not saying that's the optimum situation, just that it could ultimately lead to a better future than we think...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Here's a little more data relevant to this thread's title.  The new senator from Colorado, Cory Gardner, has teemed up with fellow Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, to ask GAO to review NASA's commercial cargo contracts in light of this year's failures.  Their letter to GAO is attached.

This letter strikes me as less unreasonable than the one sent by Gardner (then in the House) and Reps. Mo Brooks (R-Alabama) and Mike Coffman (R--Colorado) in 2014 alleging that SpaceX was covering up an "epidemic of anomalies".  Still, if Gardner and Vitter truly believe that they must be "responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars in achieving our priorities and goals for spaceflight," to quote their letter, then how can they ignore, for example, the $2 billion annualy spent on uncompeted contracts for SLS when it has no well-defined purpose?

The 'game' is now becoming silly. U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) has thrown his weight into this assault on CRS as well:

http://spacenews.com/colorado-lawmaker-pushes-u-s-air-force-to-scrutinize-spacex/

But he is specifically targeting SpaceX. Coffman being the representative from Colorado makes him anything but unpartial as his state is home to some of the biggest competitors of SpaceX.
« Last Edit: 09/04/2015 06:04 am by woods170 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Or you might get a space program that focuses only on robotic exploration because most politicians believe that human exploration is too expensive and there are other more important needs than space.

And that may happen once the ISS is decommissioned, since I think the SLS program will be closed down prior to 2024 for lack of need, and there are currently no funded programs that require humans in space except for supporting the ISS.

Gerst indicated that NASA wil still have LEO needs after the ISS is splashed. He indicated that they could be interested in renting a Bigelow module (even before the ISS is splashed).

I think that the general intent is to make LEO commercial. But commercial still means pursuing governement as clients. In any event, I think that's a step in the right direction.

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
Gerst indicated that NASA wil still have LEO needs after the ISS is splashed. He indicated that they could be interested in renting a Bigelow module (even before the ISS is splashed).

I think that the general intent is to make LEO commercial. But commercial still means pursuing governement as clients. In any event, I think that's a step in the right direction.

I don't disagree.  Just that there is no funding to do that as of today, and it's not something that can go up on short notice.

Plus, what is the goal?  If it is to continue what is being done on the ISS, why not just keep the ISS?  Might be cheaper than trying to replicate, in a more limited fashion, the same setup on a series of Bigelow modules.

For the U.S. Government to keep spending money on sending humans into space, for whatever reason, there needs to be an overarching goal.  Something clearly articulated.  I don't see a Republican Congress agreeing to funding something without that, and the chances of it being funded drop considerably if a Democrat is elected President next.

There are big changes coming, and we all may not like them...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline RocketEconomist327

  • Rocket Economist
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 812
  • Infecting the beltway with fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets.
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 62
Republicans in Congress, what will they do?  Well if you have an entrenched company in your district they will use their power to defend you.  Never mind these military officers have spent a lifetime in the military and have decades of honorable service... which is more than can be said for some.

Colorado Lawmaker Pushes U.S. Air Force To Scrutinize SpaceX

Quote from: Space News
WASHINGTON – U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) said Sept. 2 that despite assurances from the Air Force that it is keeping close tabs on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket failure investigation, he remains “extremely concerned” by what he characterized as the service’s “hands-off” approach.

http://spacenews.com/colorado-lawmaker-pushes-u-s-air-force-to-scrutinize-spacex/

The US Air Force is very confident with what SpaceX is doing wrt the investigation.  Frankly, it is pretty disingenuous for some to think that the Air Force would put a asset on a Falcon 9 without being 100 percent confident in the vehicle.  Same mantra from tired Republicans who are protecting their districts and not the best interest of the American people.

VR
RE327
You can talk about all the great things you can do, or want to do, in space; but unless the rocket scientists get a sound understanding of economics (and quickly), the US space program will never achieve the greatness it should.

Putting my money where my mouth is.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Here's a little more data relevant to this thread's title.  The new senator from Colorado, Cory Gardner, has teemed up with fellow Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, to ask GAO to review NASA's commercial cargo contracts in light of this year's failures.  Their letter to GAO is attached.

This letter strikes me as less unreasonable than the one sent by Gardner (then in the House) and Reps. Mo Brooks (R-Alabama) and Mike Coffman (R--Colorado) in 2014 alleging that SpaceX was covering up an "epidemic of anomalies".  Still, if Gardner and Vitter truly believe that they must be "responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars in achieving our priorities and goals for spaceflight," to quote their letter, then how can they ignore, for example, the $2 billion annualy spent on uncompeted contracts for SLS when it has no well-defined purpose?

The 'game' is now becoming silly. U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) has thrown his weight into this assault on CRS as well:

http://spacenews.com/colorado-lawmaker-pushes-u-s-air-force-to-scrutinize-spacex/

But he is specifically targeting SpaceX. Coffman being the representative from Colorado makes him anything but unpartial as his state is home to some of the biggest competitors of SpaceX.

Looks like the folks at SN have noticed it too:
http://spacenews.com/editorial-open-season-on-spacex/

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
McCarthy has also been one of only a few members of Congress receiving donations from Elon Musk,

http://spacenews.com/commercial-space-supporter-leading-candidate-to-become-next-house-speaker/

Quote
Commercial Space Supporter Leading Candidate to Become Next House Speaker

WASHINGTON — The surprise announcement by House Speaker Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) that he would resign from Congress may clear the way for a staunch supporter of the commercial space industry to ascend to the top post in the chamber.
>
The leading candidate to succeed Boehner is House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is second only to Boehner in the House Republican leadership. His district includes the Mojave Air and Space Port, a commercial spaceport that is home to several space companies, including Masten Space Systems, Stratolaunch Systems and Virgin Galactic.
>
DM

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
« Last Edit: 10/08/2015 04:49 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1