posted 11-04-2008 10:48 PM               

During his presidency, Obama will make decisions that will shape the immediate and far reaching future for the United States' space exploration efforts. His administration will decide when the space shuttle program of the past 30 years will come to an end and influence the ultimate direction(s) that its successor will fly.

As a point of reference moving forward, Obama's space policy is offered here, as well as a video that captures some of the NASA-related comments he made during the campaign.

When I was growing up, NASA united Americans to a common purpose and inspired the world with accomplishments we are still proud of. Today, NASA is an organization that impacts many facets of American life. I believe NASA needs an inspirational vision for the 21st Century. My vision will build on the great goals set forth in recent years, to maintain a robust program of human space exploration and ensure the fulfillment of NASA's mission. Together, we can ensure that NASA again reflects all that is best about our country and continue our nation's preeminence in space.

-- Barack Obama

posted 11-05-2008 02:56 AM               

It's going to be a difficult few years and I wish our President success. I hope the gracious-ness of both Obama's and McCain's remarks tonight will turn into national cooperation as we tackle the difficult issues ahead.

posted 11-05-2008 06:53 AM               

All the social policies the new President Elect wishes to create will have to paid for from somewhere.

posted 11-05-2008 09:36 AM               

The rumors of our space program's demise is again being greatly exaggerated.

Should we be complacent and not vocalize our support for space exploration? No, absolutely not. Write letters, send e-mails, support pro-space organizations and rally for what you feel is right.

The federal budget is not, and has never been, the driving barrier to exploration. It is, and has always been, a matter of will. To quote from history:

We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

posted 11-05-2008 09:47 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by cspg:
And if the space program needs to be shut down to make sure that every American isn't left behind, as it is the case today, then so be it.

---

If after the massive amounts of money that has been poured into social programs for the last 40 years is still leaving people behind, more money is not going to solve anything.

posted 11-05-2008 09:49 AM               

When asked why he was pitting the space program against education, he said:

"NASA has lost focus and is no longer associated with inspiration,' he said. 'I don't think our kids are watching the space shuttle launches. It used to be a remarkable thing. It doesn't even pass for news anymore."

The guy goes on to say:

posted 11-05-2008 10:01 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by snf13:
When asked why he was pitting the space program against education...

---

The linked article is dated April 2008; in August, Obama spoke of the change:

I know it's still being reported that we were talking about delaying some aspects of the Constellation program to pay for our early education program. I told my staff we're going to find an entirely different offset, because we've got to make sure that the money that's going into NASA for basic research and development continues to go there. That has been a top priority for us.

posted 11-05-2008 10:54 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by KSCartist:
Now let's fix these problems and light this candle!

---

posted 11-05-2008 12:39 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
If we are going to hold Obama to his campaign promises -- which we should do -- then we must acknowledge the entire policy that was in place at the time he was elected.

---

Those he said would be paying less, won't. Those he said would be paying more, will pay an even larger amount.

That which would be accomplished will instead be replaced with "things are worse than we thought..."

That which he said would be accomplished with bipartisan cooperation will go down in flames due to "those dishonest, dirty (political party here)".

posted 11-05-2008 01:23 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimsz:
A politician keeping his campaign promises after the election? Not going to happen!

---

Between 1912 and 1948, presidents fulfilled about 72 percent of their promises, Wagner said. That number rose to around 75 percent between the 1950s and 1970s, and even though it's dropped recently, Wagner said, presidents still have a fairly high success rate.

"Typically, presidents work very hard to keep their campaign promises," Wagner said.

President Bill Clinton had the highest rate of successful campaign promises of the last seven presidents, Wagner said. President Richard Nixon had the lowest rate of fulfilled promises with a 56 percent success rate.

posted 11-05-2008 03:13 PM               

There is no doubt that Obama is a transformational figure and that his story could only have happened in America. I am very proud of many American accomplishments, including this one.

posted 11-05-2008 03:57 PM               

"I don't think we're going back to the moon for 50 years... maybe longer..."

posted 11-05-2008 04:35 PM               

I don't think the program will get cut, not when Florida, California and Texas employ a large percentage of the workforce needed to make it happen (three very powerful states during election years with some rather powerful companies in their borders). Space became an issue this election season and in the meshing of domestic, foreign and other policies, I don't anticipate it going away anytime soon. But that being said, the money will have to come from somewhere.

posted 11-05-2008 09:47 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jay Chladek:
Apparently it was Obama who was instrumental in getting legislation passed so NASA could purchase Soyuz flights past 2012. I was skeptical about him before, but that was one little ray of light. ...

---

As I mentioned in the earlier thread regarding the candidates' space policies, the article that said that Griffin sent a letter to Obama thanking him for his leadership on the waiver to the non-proliferation act went on to say that MANY members of Congress were sent identical letters.

I applaud you for your optimism, but his leadership on the non-proliferation act waiver is not very strong evidence on which to base that optimism. IMO.

posted 11-06-2008 08:42 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
A study of presidential campaign promises...

---

posted 11-06-2008 01:03 PM               

• oversight of financial institutions and markets,
  
• U.S. efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan,
  
• protecting the homeland,
  
• undisciplined defense spending,
  
• improving the U.S. image abroad,
  
• finalizing plans for the 2010 Census,
  
• caring for service members,
  
• preparing for public health emergencies,
  
• revamping oversight of food safety,
  
• restructuring the approach to surface transportation,
  
• retirement of the Space Shuttle,
  
• ensuring an effective transition to digital TV, and
  
• rebuilding military readiness.

posted 11-06-2008 01:54 PM               

Like it or not, we will be stuck with the incoming administration for the next 4 years. So I am not planning on obsessively worrying about what they are going to do (or what the won't do) every day that Obama is in office. That type of concern can eat at a person. I will stay informed though (which is different).

posted 11-07-2008 05:27 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by cspg:
I'm perfectly fine with it.

---

If not, no kidding you'd be fine with NASA shutting down, what are the odds of your nation picking up the slack?

You can thank the American space program for the following spin-offs:

• Programmable pacemakers;
  
• voltage controllers (escalators, elevators);
  
• three-dimensional imaging systems that allow physicians to accurately scan casts from patients with cleft palates - thereby allowing more effective surgeries which in turn allows the patient the best possibility to develop better linguistic capability;
  
• advancement of better lubricant technologies from industrial to household applications;
  
• fire-resistant fabrics used by firefighters the world over;
  
• carbon monoxide detectors that distinguished between deadly gases and simple water vapor;
  
• conductive film that prevents the fogging up of windows on high altitude aircraft as well as clear plastic cradle warmers for newborns;
  
• unsinkable life rafts;
  
• document-deciphering technology - used to read nearly invisible text on historical documents, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls;
• spray-on fireproofing protective barriers (used on the skeletal structures of every modern skyscraper in the world!) as the coating is burned off it dissipates the heat energy.

posted 11-08-2008 12:10 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Apollo Redux:
Are you an American living abroad?

---

I don't "belong" to any nation. I consider myself stateless. As for "picking up the slack", I didn't know that the space program was such a burden.

I'm not questioning the space program's spin-off; just the fact in view of increasing number of issues this planet is facing, there are some aspects of the space program which can wait. I'm playing the devil's advocate here but I still don't see any rationale, let alone convincing argument to send people to the Moon or beyond, especially when such program will have to come up from (future) taxes that apparently no one is willing to pay. Not that issues need to be mutually exclusive but when you're aware that on this planet a child dies every 5 seconds of malnutrition, prioritizing may be in order.

quote:

---

I just wonder how willing some people would be to give up the things that make their modern life easier, the very things that owe their existence to the pioneering efforts of NASA?

---

posted 11-14-2008 11:38 AM               

The new president should immediately assign White House coordination of all non-defense space activities to his science advisor, the assistant to the president for science and technology, who will also serve as director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy. In the first 100 days, the president, with the advice of his science advisor, should appoint a commission to assess the current status of the U.S. space program and make specific recommendations for necessary actions in both the short term and the long term.

Specifically, the decision to phase out the shuttle by 2010 should be reconsidered; it should be flown until a suitable replacement becomes available. Talks with our international ISS partners should be held to openly discuss the future of the ISS and commitments by the partner nations. The Vision for Space Exploration should be reevaluated and modified to reflect realistic goals and expectations of future budgets, manpower, national priorities, and opportunities for international cooperation, including access to the program for our space partners. And any future plans by the United States to return women and men to the moon and someday to Mars should involve many U.S. federal agencies, universities, and industry, and should be fully international in scope.

In the meantime, science, including earth observations, should be restated as a top priority for NASA. Wasteful cuts and delays in science missions should be reevaluated and, where warranted, restored. Coordination between NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.S. Geological Survey should be strengthened. Consideration also should be given to the suggestion that NOAA and USGS be combined to form a new Earth Systems Science Agency.

The steady decline in funding for NASA's aeronautics programs -- down 32 percent between FY2004 and 2007 -- should be reversed. And a group of eminent aeronautical experts from the government, academia, and industry should be constituted and charged with laying out a roadmap for a revitalized NASA aeronautics program, along with supporting test facilities that would provide the research and development to ensure U.S. leadership in this critical discipline.

A key stated objective of all NASA's research and technology programs should be to excite a new generation of scientists and engineers and rebuild scientific and technical expertise within NASA and across the nation -- a critical need highlighted in the National Academy report "Rising above the Gathering Storm." NASA's research center structure should be reestablished with this objective in mind.

A revitalized NASA will be essential to ensure U.S. leadership as a strong international partner in the peaceful uses of space. Over these past eight years, there has been a movement urging U.S domination of space. We should heed instead the words of John F. Kennedy:

"We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man..."

Our civil space activities must continue to play a preeminent role in making President Kennedy's words a reality.

posted 11-26-2008 10:52 AM               

U.S President-elect Barack Obama has added a Virgin Galactic adviser and two more former NASA officials to the team leading the transition at the U.S. space agency.

The selection of Alan Ladwig, NASA's associate administrator for policy and plans under U.S. President Bill Clinton; Ed Heffernan, then-NASA Administrator Dan Goldin's chief of staff; and George Whitesides, executive director of the National Space Society and senior adviser to Virgin Galactic; brings the number of NASA transition team members to five.

Lori Garver, who replaced Ladwig as associate administrator for policy and plans in 1999, and Roderick Young, Goldin's one-time press secretary, were named to the NASA the transition team Nov. 14.

Ladwig was manager for space systems consulting at Whitney, Bradley & Brown Inc. of Reston, Va., but resigned that post Nov. 14. Whitesides is on leave from both of his positions and Heffernan, who most recently was vice president of government relations for Safeco of Seattle, is between jobs, according to associates.

The political buzz is that President-elect Barack Obama is looking at New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson as Commerce Secretary or some other senior post in his administration.

...During a press gab session [at the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge in October], Richardson was asked about any possible post he might play in an Obama White House. The New Mexico governor played it a little coy, but said:

"Here's what I want to be sure of... that the Obama administration is pro-commercial space... that the administration is pro-space, pro-government space, pro-commercial space," Richardson observed.

Richardson said that "it's in the interest of our national space industry that commercial space could properly develop... so I will be an advocate wherever I am... hopefully here, still as governor of New Mexico... you never know."

posted 11-26-2008 11:10 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by cspg:
...but when you're aware that on this planet a child dies every 5 seconds of malnutrition, prioritizing may be in order.

---

posted 11-26-2008 11:57 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimsz:
This figure is derived from where?

---

quote:

---

Space program or not will have no affect on those dying of malnutrition.

---

posted 11-27-2008 11:09 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by cspg:
No. But the space program can wait (and will have to).

---

What will waiting accomplish? Must we really solve every problem here on Earth before we can resume the exploration of space? Again, this is the same old tired (and false) argument that the dollars appropriated for NASA must have been taken from the mouths of children...and that if only we ended the space program, we might be able to solve all of our other problems in the world.

Keep in mind that NASA employs thousands of engineers and keeps several large contractors busy (which also employ thousands). End the space program and you'll suddenly leave many thousands of space workers (and their families) without an income. Ironically, the immediate impact of ending the space program would be that many families would go "hungry."

The reason we set deadlines is for both the purpose of setting a goal and for budgetary reasons. If we didn't set deadlines for space exploration, we would have no benchmark to measure our progress or to gauge the effectiveness of our spending. It's a basic principle of project management that most program managers (whether they be in the space program or not) must adhere to. Try telling the American taxpayer (or Congress) that we'll land on Mars "eventually" while asking to spend billions of dollars every year to reach that goal.

posted 11-27-2008 06:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by cspg:
There's no rush to spend hundreds of billions of $ to send an astronaut to Mars by a given deadline.

---

posted 11-27-2008 06:12 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blackarrow:
The irony is that the last few months have shown us in very graphic terms what a comparatively miniscule amount of money goes to NASA.

---

posted 11-27-2008 06:30 PM               

NASA struggled for decades and did breathtaking things with their budget, eventually landing on the moon. It offered to go to Mars for less than a trillion. When it did justify its budget, it did it based on a track record of many years and of huge amounts of concrete benefits. And still, it didn't get the money it wanted.

When a few banks come up with some story about how, unless they're bailed out, there will be a great depression, people just say: sure, here's the cash. No evidence, no track record of right economic prediction (the reverse in fact), no particular benefit to humanity - it doesn't matter.