Author
|
Topic: Presidential '08 candidates' space policies
|
Jay Chladek Member Posts: 2272 From: Bellevue, NE, USA Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 03-11-2008 02:23 AM
There is one thing I find a little disturbing about the 5 year gap between space launches. It means that if and when Orion does get off the pad, assuming that the candidate that wins the election becomes just a one term president, then the first launch of Orion won't be on their presidential watch. If past experience is any indication, politicians like to back something if they are pretty certain they will be around when it reaches a successful conclusion. As such, they can ride the coat tails of its popularity and claim a share of the credit for its success.This is one of the reasons why long term high profile space projects tend to flounder when an administration change occurs. |
issman1 Member Posts: 1042 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 03-12-2008 11:52 AM
Whoever gets elected president, and I hope its Obama, how about some real shuttle diplomacy?Why not invite a Chinese taikonaut to fly on the final US Shuttle mission? In exchange a NASA astronaut could be trained to co-pilot a Chinese Shenzhou for a docking mission to the ISS? Now that would be historic! |
KSCartist Member Posts: 2896 From: Titusville, FL USA Registered: Feb 2005
|
posted 03-12-2008 11:56 AM
Not a bad idea actually. I mean who would have thought in 1965 that we'd be partners with the Russians now?I know the Shenzhou is comparable with the Soyuz. Would the docking mechanism work with the ISS? Tim |
John Youskauskas Member Posts: 126 From: Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 03-26-2008 04:17 PM
TV ALERT:CNN is going to talk about the '08 presidential race and the space program with some comments from the astronauts very shortly during this hour. |
Glint Member Posts: 1040 From: New Windsor, Maryland USA Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 04-01-2008 02:06 PM
Although it's words from a surrogate and not from the candidate herself, Chelsea Clinton took a break from criticizing her father's successor to answer a question about NASA funding according to an article by the Associated Press: In response to a question about NASA funding, Clinton said the budgets of many scientific programs have either stayed flat or been cut. She pointed to Bush's veto of stem cell research bills."We don't know what we have lost under this administration," she said. So in response to direct questioning regarding NASA funding, Chelsea gives an answer dealing with stem cell research? The dutiful daughter has learned to dissemble from the best. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-09-2008 11:39 AM
I was curious on other viewpoints you guys might have on the current political situation as it relates to space. I use to call my self a republican but over the last few years have become more independent... However the space program is so important to me that it will no doubt play a large roll in how I vote in November.Please sound off if you have strong opinions about the current candidates, and please explain why you feel the way you do with facts if possible. thanks Scott |
jimsz Member Posts: 616 From: Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-09-2008 01:33 PM
I don't think any Presidential candidate can be taken at their word on most things.The space program is of minor concern to most Americans and the candidates will speak to the audience. If it is space enthusiasts like we have here, they would be for it until they are against it when speaking to some other group. Kennedy chose space as pure political move and had little interest in it. The russians were moving forward, he had a political fiasco with the Bay of Pigs and he needed to change the story. Until the Chinese actually pull off something original and threatening to the US dominance in space the politicians will do little to support the cost. Also, look at who wants to spend the most money on social welfare programs. that money has to come from other budget items and often those that support social programs do not support spending money on NASA. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-09-2008 02:11 PM
Here's to hoping your wrong... but I know you speak the truth. Maybe china will announce a moon trip soon. They seem to have the money and their national pride in their space program seems to succeed ours if you believe the media. |
Mr Meek Member Posts: 353 From: Chattanooga, TN Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted 04-09-2008 02:14 PM
The OT bit: Miss Clinton's response is in line with someone who believes something can't happen unless the federal government is involved. (Not an attack, just an observation) Restrictions weren't placed on private research or funding; and as further research has proved, we don't necessarily need embryonic stem cells to do the wonderful things stem cells can do.Back on topic, I agree that you can't trust politicians in election season. Even Kenndey's vision was under attack following Apollo 1. I do wonder if our culture posesses the fortitude it takes to explore the unknown. Kennedy's sale of the plan relied heavily on national pride. Are we truly a nation of couch potatoes, or will there be a groundswell of people that catch the grander vision of humanity in space? Say what you will for international cooperation (I'm for it, but I'm also a realist); someone has to take the lead. From a technology and infrastructre standpoint, the US is best positioned at the moment to do that. Given another 25 years, another developed nation may take the lead if we don't. Personally, I'd rather not wait that long. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-09-2008 02:52 PM
I am kinda past paying attention to what the Clinton Campaign says... looks like either McCain or Obama is going to be the next pres. It is going to be a hard decision between those two... but I am sure the choice will become clearer as time goes by. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-09-2008 03:29 PM
quote: Originally posted by Mr Meek: Miss Clinton's response is in line with someone who believes something can't happen unless the federal government is involved. (Not an attack, just an observation) Restrictions weren't placed on private research or funding; and as further research has proved, we don't necessarily need embryonic stem cells to do the wonderful things stem cells can do.
To bring the off-topic on-topic, you realize that you just repeated (more or less) the arguments offered by NASA's detractors as why the government should be funding space exploration and/or why the risk of human lives (astronauts) should be substituted by robotic probes, right? |
Mr Meek Member Posts: 353 From: Chattanooga, TN Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted 04-09-2008 03:56 PM
On a very general level, sure. But there's a vast difference between the two.Simply put, there are many things a human can do that a robotic probe cannot. However, adult iPS cells can do just about everything an embryonic cell can, while avoiding the sticky ethical controversy. I can guarantee you that Ms. Clinton's remarks were referring to embryonic stem cell research, and not the general topic (which continues to be funded by both federal and private sources). (Incidentally, the articles sourced in that wikipedia article are fascinating reading for anyone interested in the topic of stem cells.) |
LCDR Scott Schneeweis New Member Posts: From: Registered:
|
posted 04-09-2008 04:05 PM
quote: Originally posted by jimsz: Until the Chinese actually pull off something original and threatening to the US dominance in space the politicians will do little to support the cost.
That wake-up call already took place with the Chinese ASAT demonstration; unfortunately it will take the underpinning of an adversarial relationship bearing the potential of an existential threat before we will see sustained US political commitment to an aggressive manned space program.------------------ Scott Schneeweis http://www.SPACEAHOLIC.com/ |
issman1 Member Posts: 1042 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 04-16-2008 08:19 AM
If human spaceflight can only evolve by "an adversarial relationship" then we really have no right to take our pettiness to another planet! |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-23-2008 06:52 PM
A couple of recent articles on this topic: - Popular Mechanics: How Clinton, Obama and McCain Could Change U.S. Space Policy: Geek the Vote Guest Analysis
The post-Bush breaking point seems simple enough: A new administration will either support the current direction of NASA or strike out on a new path. But with the space shuttle’s retirement set to free up funding in two years for the already complex Ares and Orion shots at manned orbit and lunar landing—not to mention the expanding private-space industry and struggling economy—our next decade in space remains decidedly undecided.What are the chances that a President McCain, Clinton or Obama will support NASA’s plan as is? Based on an evaluation of campaign talk thus far, the smart money is on a delay, at best. - American Thinker: Obama's Plan for NASA
As the legend goes, when the Spanish conquistador Hernando Cortez landed in what is now Mexico in 1519, he ordered the boats that brought him and his men there to be burned. Obama seems to have something similar planned for NASA.Although the MSM has largely ignored Barack Obama's plans for NASA, the issue is likely to bubble up during the general election campaign, if he's the Democratic nominee. Here's why.
|
Cliff Lentz Member Posts: 655 From: Philadelphia, PA USA Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 04-24-2008 07:29 AM
I'm not really optimistic with any of the candidates. The Space program gets so little of the national budget, but gets ALL the blame and attention when it comes to talk of budget cuts. It seems that the every country in the world is pursueing some type of space program. Do we really want to be scaling down while the rest of the world moves forward? |
LCDR Scott Schneeweis New Member Posts: From: Registered:
|
posted 04-25-2008 07:55 PM
CNN Election Center just aired a 10 minute segment entitled "Candidates and the Space Race" which reported on the ascendancy of the Chinese Space Program, ramifications for the US and the presidential candidates position. ------------------ Scott Schneeweis http://www.SPACEAHOLIC.com/ |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-26-2008 10:15 PM
quote: Originally posted by LCDR Scott Schneeweis: ...which reported on the ascendancy of the Chinese Space Program, ramifications for the US and the presidential candidates position.
I think "reported" might be giving CNN too much credit, at least in this regard. The piece seems to be all over the map, comparing apples to oranges, getting facts wrong (or at least being rather selective in their data) and then relegating the candidates positions to an afterthought, rather than the main focus of the piece as advertised.Early in the segment, the point is made of listing how many rockets were launched by the U.S., Russia and China during 2007. Looking past the fact they got the count wrong (by at least three launches for the U.S.), for the layman watching, they might assume (a) that all the launches were space exploration focused and/or (b) that all were government funded (and therefore in the purview of the candidates' policies), but neither is true. It then points to a Chinese lunar orbiter (without mentioning that Japan did the same, or that the U.S. did so within the past decade) and makes the leap to suggest that China is making any serious (as in funded) strides toward Mars (and of course, it is well within Bob Zubrin's interest to foster that idea, though even his comments are so brief that they could have been taken out of context). Then it mentions China's ASAT test, as if that would be a reason why exploration efforts would be better funded and brings on a CNN analyst with a toss away comment. We then finally get to the candidates, but instead of using the past three quarters of the segment to go into depth about the differences in their polices, we get less than the Cliff Notes version, which makes each sound better about the issue than any really are. All in all, not a very informative, if not misleading piece. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-27-2008 11:29 AM
quote: Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: We then finally get to the candidates, but instead of using the past three quarters of the segment to go into depth about the differences in their polices, we get less than the Cliff Notes version, which makes each sound better about the issue than any really are.
That is really not the way I took it... even though it was a gloss over it pretty much made clear that none of the candidates are going to support a return to the moon on the current time schedule. I have tried to read every statement from all 3 candidates and really all that we can hope for is a change of heart from the winner. Ares 1 will fly but that's about it. A space race with China might sadly be our only hope. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-27-2008 11:39 AM
quote: Originally posted by Mercury7: ...it pretty much made clear that none of the candidates are going to support a return to the moon on the current time schedule.
But if that's the case (and I'm not saying it isn't), it then puts all three on an even playing field and suggests to voters that any one is not better for the space program than the others. That is why it is important for the details of their policies to be discussed, as has been done for others issues. There is a big difference between freezing discretionary funding and favoring robotic exploration, for example, or diverting funding to other programs versus trying to shorten the "gap", to offer another. These are the polices on which, in part, votes need to be cast. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-27-2008 01:32 PM
I think the part I don't understand is what the penalty is for fully funding NASA. It represents such a small fraction of the budget... would the public outcry really be so severe even if NASA's budget was doubled? Would there be a net loss of votes by saying they support going back to the moon? Maybe they should just merge NASA back into the Dept of Defense. Plenty of money for everything there. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-27-2008 01:46 PM
The public's perception is that NASA takes a far larger slice of the budget than it really does. When you add that to the equally false belief that space exploration is a luxury and does not impact the average Joe's life, you start to see the objections. When President Bush announced the Vision for Space Exploration, it was met with ridicule by the general press (and through them the public) as it came across as a pipe dream at best and a 'wag the dog' distraction at its worst. (Part of this can be blamed on the way it was announced; not as a national priority but a middle of the week, mid-afternoon presser, after much of what was going to be said had been leaked more than a week earlier.) NASA was never part of the Department of Defense and I cannot imagine a scenario where exploration wouldn't suffer far greater were it left to the military. The DoD has in its past (if not also its present) assigned more money than NASA's entire budget to space activities and has accomplished far less in that arena. |
LCDR Scott Schneeweis New Member Posts: From: Registered:
|
posted 04-27-2008 02:10 PM
quote: Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: The DoD has in its past (if not also its present) assigned more money than NASA's entire budget to space activities and has accomplished far less in that arena.
Thats a tad unfair as the budgets are not analogous... DOD has and continues to accomplish a great deal in space - but its been in a manner complementary to it's existing charter (reconnaissance, communications, weather, IA, offensive/defensive kinetics, etc.) and development of many of the enabling technologies from which commercial space exploitation benefits. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-27-2008 02:19 PM
My DoD comment was really meant in jest... because they are spending NASA's entire budget in a very short period of time.Although I have sometimes thought that some of the NASA mission could be at least temporarily reassigned to free up funds for Constellation... at least until the space gap was closed. On another note... the U.S. Space Command is such a secretive organization, there are probably very few people that would know if they are spending wisely or not. All we hear about are spy satellites but I am sure it is much deeper than that... maybe we already have a base on the Moon. ![](http://collectspace.com/ubb/smile.gif) |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-27-2008 02:24 PM
quote: Originally posted by LCDR Scott Schneeweis: DOD has and continues to accomplish a great deal in space...
It's not that they haven't had their share of accomplishments, but that for the money they are given, they seemingly achieve far less. They are (or have) dedicated more money than all of NASA's budget to space activities, whereas NASA has to divide the funds between aeronautics and space, and within the latter, manned and unmanned activities. To use the CNN example, during 2007, NASA and the DoD each accounted for 7 launches. NASA supported the same flight rate as the DoD at a lower budget, and included within that count are three manned missions (not even taking into consideration Soyuz and Progress launch support) and a probe launched to Mars. |
Mercury7 Member Posts: 360 From: Greenville, SC, USA Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-27-2008 02:43 PM
Is it possible... or even legal for DoD to take on part of NASA's responsibilities on a temporary basis? I mean obviously it would be a political move to make it appear NASA's budget was being trimmed. It seems like a good solution. The defense dept is such a black hole, they could add 10s of billions to that budget and no one would flinch. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-27-2008 02:52 PM
quote: Originally posted by Mercury7: Is it possible... or even legal for DoD to take on part of NASA's responsibilities on a temporary basis?
In a word, no. NASA's budget is awarded based on the agency's responsibilities; remove those, and so goes the money that was allocated for them. |
Glint Member Posts: 1040 From: New Windsor, Maryland USA Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 04-30-2008 03:50 PM
I know, I know. It's not exactly on topic. But this link's still pretty cool as far as political cartoons go. |
cspg Member Posts: 6210 From: Geneva, Switzerland Registered: May 2006
|
posted 05-01-2008 12:21 AM
I love political cartoons! Always amazed at the talent these authors have. ![](http://collectspace.com/ubb/smile.gif) Chris. |
FFrench Member Posts: 3161 From: San Diego Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 05-28-2008 12:31 PM
A Florida Today story about Senator Obama's space program thoughts."Obama said he would fund a strengthened space program, including the Orion program, which is designed to return Americans to the moon and later get them to Mars. "Obama said he wanted to revive the energy the country had for the space program during the Mercury and Apollo programs. The Mercury program launched the first Americans into space, and the Apollo program landed Americans on the moon. "'Now, even though lots of good work is being done with the shuttle program, I don't think people have as deep of a commitment to the space program,' he said." |
Rodina Member Posts: 836 From: Lafayette, CA Registered: Oct 2001
|
posted 06-06-2008 07:41 AM
McCain would like to see a man on Mars "I am intrigued by a man on Mars and I think that it would excite the imagination of the American people if we can say, 'Hey, here's what it looks like," he said. Of course, I'm guessing the man he'd most like to see on Mars is Barack Obama. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-06-2008 08:16 AM
A longer account of the same man-on-Mars speech by McCain was published by the Associated Press: John McCain told Florida newspaper editors on Thursday he would support continuing space shuttle missions beyond 2010, when the space flights are now scheduled to end.But he said the country needs to rethink the way it communicates with Americans about the space program. "We need to do a better job of getting support of the American people and outlining specific missions for NASA," McCain said, responding to a question from Florida Today executive editor Terry Eberle, whose paper serves Melbourne and the Space Coast. And Florida Today's report, the source of the AP and AFP articles: "Of course I'm disturbed when we have to rely on the Russians or any other country. As you know, the Chinese are getting also very big into the space business," McCain said. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-07-2008 07:26 PM
During her concession speech delivered Saturday ending her run for the presidency, Sen. Hilary Clinton indirectly referenced astronaut Karen Nyberg aboard space shuttle Discovery: As we gather here today in this historic, magnificent building, the 50th woman to leave this Earth is orbiting overhead. If we can blast 50 women into space, we will someday launch a woman into the White House. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 07-30-2008 09:15 AM
Both John McCain and Barack Obama made statements yesterday in support of NASA on the 50th anniversary of the National Aeronautics and Space Act being signed into law. Statement by John McCain on the 50th Anniversary of NASA "Fifty years ago today, President Eisenhower signed the bill that launched the United States on the magnificent journey to space discovery and exploration. In doing so, he sent a powerful message to the world that the United State would harness its creativity, inventiveness and drive to lead all others into this most distant frontier. Since that time, Presidents of both parties have remained steadfast in guaranteeing U.S. leadership in space. Under current plans, the United States will retire the space shuttle in 2010 after its final mission to the international space station, and thus lose the capability to send on our own, an American to space. While my opponent seems content to retreat from American exploration of Space for a decade, I am not. As President, I will act to make ensure our astronauts will continue to explore space, and not just by hitching a ride with someone else. I intend to make sure that the NASA constellation program has the resources it needs so that we can begin a new era of human space exploration. A country that sent a man to the moon should expect no less." NASA's 50th Anniversary: Statement from Sen. Obama "Fifty years ago, President Eisenhower officially created the NASA space program, capturing the imagination of generations and inspiring Americans to think bigger, aim higher and believe in a greater tomorrow. When I was young, the astronauts would come to Hawaii after landing in the Pacific Ocean. I remember the incredible inspiration I felt from knowing that these men had gone where few had gone before them."In recent years, Washington has failed to give NASA a robust, balanced and adequately funded mission. Though the good people of NASA who work day in and day out on new frontiers are doing amazing things, Americans are no longer inspired as they once were. That's a failure of leadership. "I believe we need to revitalize NASA's mission to maintain America's leadership, and recommit our nation to the space program, and as President I intend to do just that. We must revive the American ingenuity that led millions of children look to NASA astronauts and scientists as role models and enter the fields of math, engineering and science. Our leadership in the world depends on it." |
alanh_7 Member Posts: 1252 From: Ajax, Ontario, Canada Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 07-30-2008 11:03 AM
I can't help choose who is President (Canadian) but of the two statements I prefer McCains. |
ejectr Member Posts: 1751 From: Killingly, CT Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 07-30-2008 03:00 PM
I read on NASA Watch that Senator Obama said that he was going to revitalize education in the U.S. and the way he would fund it would be by cuttting NASA's budget.I was pretty much on the fence as to who I'd vote for until I read that. Now I read his statement above and I think, "right, get the kids into math and science at the cost of the organization that will need it the most." |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 07-30-2008 04:12 PM
Though Sen. Obama's education plan has yet to be formally revised, his comments made since its introduction have suggested he has rethought his plans with regards to NASA and specifically Constellation. As such, the spread between candidates (at least in regards to space exploration) has once again narrowed. |
ejectr Member Posts: 1751 From: Killingly, CT Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 07-30-2008 07:02 PM
Is there somewhere one might read about his rethinking of NASA and Constellation, Robert?I'd like to be as informed as possible. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 08-01-2008 10:21 AM
quote: Originally posted by ejectr: Is there somewhere one might read about his rethinking of NASA and Constellation, Robert?
His education policy was released in November 2007. In January 2008, Sen. Obama released a space policy statement that included the following: Develop the Next-Generation of Space Vehicles: The retirement of the Space Shuttle in 2010 will leave the United States without manned spaceflight capability until the introduction of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) carried by the Ares I Launch Vehicle. As president, Obama will support the development of this vital new platform to ensure that the United States' reliance on foreign space capabilities is limited to the minimum possible time period. The CEV will be the backbone of future missions, and is being designed with technology that is already proven and available. Missing from this statement was any mention of where Orion would be flying (except to say that the senator was "committed to a bold array of robotic missions that will expand our knowledge of the solar system and lay the foundations for further manned exploration"). Tomorrow, Sen. Obama is scheduled to deliver a speech in Titusville, when perhaps he may provide further details about his plans for NASA. |
Mr Meek Member Posts: 353 From: Chattanooga, TN Registered: Dec 2007
|
posted 08-01-2008 11:42 AM
Interesting that Obama has no mention of the Ares V, while being very specific about the existence (though not the mission) of the Ares I. |