Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents


Thread Closed  Topic Closed
  collectSPACE: Messages
  Free Space
  2012 GOP presidential candidates on space (Page 1)

Post New Topic  
profile | register | preferences | faq | search


This topic is 3 pages long:   1  2  3 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   2012 GOP presidential candidates on space
Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 06-13-2011 08:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
During tonight's (June 13) New Hampshire Republican presidential debate, Jean Mackin with WMUR raised a question about the role of government in the future of space exploration.
Mackin: This question goes out to Speaker Gingrich. Next month, the space shuttle program is scheduled to retire after 30 years, and last year, President Obama effectively killed government-run space flight to the International Space Station and wants to turn it over to private companies. In the meantime, U.S. astronauts would ride Russian spacecraft at a cost of $50 million to $63 million a seat.

What role should the government play in future space exploration?

Gingrich: Well, sadly — and I say this, sadly, because I'm a big fan of going into space and I actually worked to get the shuttle program to survive at one point — NASA has become an absolute case study in why bureaucracy can't innovate.

If you take all the money we've spent at NASA since we landed on the moon and you had applied that money for incentives to the private sector, we would today probably have a permanent station on the moon, three or four permanent stations in space, a new generation of lift vehicles. And instead, what we've had is bureaucracy after bureaucracy after bureaucracy and failure after failure.

I think it's a tragedy, because younger Americans ought to have the excitement of thinking that they, too, could be part of reaching out to a new frontier.

You know, you'd asked earlier, John, about this idea of limits because we're a developed country. We're not a developed country. The scientific future is going to open up, and we're at the beginning of a whole new cycle of extraordinary opportunities. And, unfortunately, NASA is standing in the way of it, when NASA ought to be getting out of the way and encouraging the private sector.

CNN Anchor John King: Is there any candidate who would step in and say, no, this is vital to America's identity, this is vital to America's innovation, I want the government to stay in the lead here when it comes to manned space flight? Nobody?

Tim Pawlenty: Yeah, I think the space program has played a vital role for the United States of America. I think in the context...

King: But can we afford it going forward?

Pawlenty: In the context of our budget challenges, it can be refocused and re-prioritized, but I don't think we should be eliminating the space program. We can partner with private providers to get more economies of scale and scale it back, but I don't think we should eliminate the space program.

King: In a sentence — in a sentence or two?

(Crosstalk)

Gingrich: John, you mischaracterized me. I didn't say end the space program. We built the transcontinental railroads without a national department of railroads. I said you could get into space faster, better, more effectively, more creatively if you decentralized it, got it out of Washington, and cut out the bureaucracy. It's not about getting rid of the space program; it's about getting to a real space program that works.

Mitt Romney: I think fundamentally there are some people — and most of them are Democrats, but not all — who really believe that the government knows how to do things better than the private sector.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 06-14-2011 08:09 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am amazed that the subject even came up. Basically, they didn't say much. The usual I love space exploration... but... nothing about goals.

Honestly, Gingrich scares me the most when it comes to NASA. He seems to forget how various Preisdents and Congresses kept changing NASA's goals and budgets so much, that yes money was wasted. The big shots need to let the rocket scientists lead more.

issman1
Member

Posts: 1042
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005

posted 06-14-2011 08:50 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for issman1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Apart from Gingrich they seemed clueless when it comes to NASA. Romney's lacklustre reply reeks of the business as usual mentality. Maybe someone should tell him about Falcon Heavy vis-a-vis the Space Launch System.

Even part of the original question, that "Obama effectively killed government-run spaceflight to the International Space Station", was erroneous to the point of ignorance. Had that lady done some research she would have found that NASA planned to rely upon Soyuz, post-shuttle, even before Obama was elected.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 06-14-2011 09:03 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What I found interesting (other than the shared surprise that space actually got a mention) was that the question handed the candidates a clear opportunity to take a swipe at President Obama (something they were not at all shy about while replying to the other questions) and none took it.
President Obama effectively killed government-run space flight...
Even if they all agreed with President Obama's proposal to adopt private sector launch solutions (and by their replies, it gave at least the appearance that they did), they could have focused on relying on the Russians in the interim.

Instead, the takeaway was that under their leadership, the path set forth by the current administration would more or less continue, without perhaps the heavy-lift and MPCV government-led projects, depending on how devoted the candidates were to "refocusing" and "re-prioritizing" NASA.

kr4mula
Member

Posts: 642
From: Cinci, OH
Registered: Mar 2006

posted 06-14-2011 11:48 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for kr4mula   Click Here to Email kr4mula     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Even if they all agreed with President Obama's proposal to adopt private sector launch solutions.

Because they do in fact agree in principle. The Republicans generally want to privatize government activities and kill bureaucracy and this goes right in line with that. None of them wants to say outright, however, that yes we should eliminate this source of American pride.

What galls me is how the mediators and the candidates are quick to blame NASA for these problems. Guess what? NASA wouldn't have all this bureaucracy, risk-aversion, and high costs if it weren't for statutory regulations (and fear for its own survival) imposed upon it by Congress, the President, and various other agencies, not to mention the term-to-term vacillations that make it nearly impossible to carry out any long-term program.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 06-14-2011 01:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Poor question, with no follow-up. I've read Gingrich's line on space before so it was no surprise. They must have been shocked at the topic.

Do these people forget how many different directions NASA was forced to waste money in going back to the Reagan and continuing for every President?

It's too bad NASA doesn't have a clear advocate who can tell these people what the deal is.

SpaceAholic
Member

Posts: 4437
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 06-14-2011 06:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SpaceAholic   Click Here to Email SpaceAholic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Did every candidate on stage respond to the question?

I think the take-away is that many of them were unprepared for the question and haven't allocated the time to understand the issue.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 06-14-2011 06:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There was enough of a pause after John King asked if any candidate would stand up for the need for government-run spaceflight for him to follow-up, "Nobody?"

Pawlenty's and Romney's subsequent replies cannot be called resounding rallies for a strong NASA. Pawlenty specifically mentioned "scaling back" and Romney all but gave a blanket endorsement of the private sector.

But let's look at the other candidates. Ron Paul is perhaps the easiest, as he's gone on the record before:

We must recognize the government led space program is dead and the corpse must be buried as soon as possible. Any defense functions should be put under the military, and the rest of NASA should be sold to private operators. The receipts would be applied to the national debt. Then, all government roadblocks to commercial development of space must be removed.
Herman Cain seems to be basing his campaign on business knows best, so while he hasn't made any specific comments about NASA, it is not too difficult to imagine him endorsing commercial spaceflight.

Michele Bachmann represents the Tea Party and while TEA in Space doesn't speak for her specifically, their reaction to the debate begins...

The policy articulated during the New Hampshire debate by Newt Gingrich, as it pertains to space, is the kind of policy we need to hear from all candidates. NASA bureaucracy is killing innovation and discovery throughout the agency.
Santorum's position on space exploration is largely unknown, but he did choose to remain quiet.

Cliff Lentz
Member

Posts: 655
From: Philadelphia, PA USA
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 06-15-2011 08:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Cliff Lentz   Click Here to Email Cliff Lentz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm not political in any way. I thought it was interesting that the question came up at all. I was really surprised that they didn't go after the president on this since they go after him on everything. I have the feeling that they are not sure of their facts so as politicians they dance around the issue and try not to say something stupid. That's the same for both parties.

I'm not sure I follow Gingrich's statement that if we used all the funds since the moon landing and applied them to the private sector, we would have a base on the moon and 3 or 4 space stations. That time period covers several Republican administrations who determined policy. It doesn't make any sense to me.

I am just glad that Sarah Palin wasn't involved in the debate. She had remarked that Sputnik was the reason that the Soviet government fell...throwing all their money into space!

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 06-16-2011 06:24 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Basically, whoever wins, NASA will not have a friend in the White House.

issman1
Member

Posts: 1042
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005

posted 06-16-2011 10:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for issman1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ron Paul's remarks, while radical, do make sense. However, Americans should be wary of NASA being reduced to a token government bureaucracy like the UK Space Agency.

Unless Mr. Obama makes a grandiose announcement about the direction of NASA human spaceflight soon, one or more of these candidates should be outspoken and substantive on this issue.

With the final shuttle flight looming, there's no better time than now to make NASA a national talking point.

Rusty B
Member

Posts: 239
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Oct 2004

posted 06-16-2011 12:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rusty B   Click Here to Email Rusty B     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think the thing to remember is that bipartisan agreements and Presidents from both parties gave us the NASA we have today.

KSCartist
Member

Posts: 2896
From: Titusville, FL USA
Registered: Feb 2005

posted 06-16-2011 01:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for KSCartist   Click Here to Email KSCartist     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by issman1:
Unless Mr. Obama makes a grandiose announcement about the direction of NASA human spaceflight soon, one or more of these candidates should be outspoken and substantive on this issue.
We've heard many grandiose statements from Presidents that led to no where. Unless Congress can agree with the White House AND provide stable multi-year funding the announcements from the President don't amount to much.

The latest case in point President Bush and the Constellation Program in 2004. Congress endorsed it, but neither the White House (asked for) or the Congress put up the money.

issman1
Member

Posts: 1042
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005

posted 06-16-2011 04:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for issman1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
True, but if the incumbent president won't then his rivals should challenge him directly. The spectre of Constellation continues to haunt NASA, but what's done is done.

If those Republican candidates genuinely care about human spaceflight, they should tell the voters now. And they should do so in a way that is both definitive and unambiguous unlike the confusing messages from Obama, via Bolden.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 06-17-2011 06:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I do not agree with Mr. Paul's statements but at least he is honest. Many candidates say they love NASA but act in the other direction.

Again responding to Mr. Gingrich, he doesn't see himself and his cohorts in Congress and the White House as part of the problem. Yes NASA has wasted billions — many times because Presidents and Congresses have made NASA shift gears. Examples — Venture Star, the exact shape, size and partners for the ISS, both Bush's plans and now this new direction.

If any Republican candidate wanted to get ahead, they would make a grand statement on space policy, which could put the President on the defensive and help them in "space states."

328KF
Member

Posts: 1234
From:
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 12-14-2011 10:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 328KF   Click Here to Email 328KF     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
A few comments from candidates Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney regarding their positions on lunar exploration, mining, and colonization from the Republican debate held Dec. 10 in Des Moines, Iowa. [via SPACE.com]
Moderator George Stephanopoulos asked former front-runner Mitt Romney to name a few issues on which he disagreed with Gingrich, who has surged into the lead in Iowa and several other early-primary states.

"Let's see. We can start with his idea to have a lunar colony that would mine minerals from the moon," Romney said. "I'm not in favor of spending that kind of money to do that."

Gingrich has indeed voiced support for lunar mining in the past, and he reaffirmed that support on Saturday.

"I'm proud of trying to find things that give young people a reason to study science and math and technology and telling them that some day in their lifetime, they could dream of going to the moon, they could dream of going to Mars," Gingrich said in response to Romney.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 12-15-2011 11:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Isn't it nice how Mr. Romney had to use a space example to attack an opponent? What does that say about his space agenda?

328KF
Member

Posts: 1234
From:
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 12-15-2011 09:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 328KF   Click Here to Email 328KF     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
All other political opinions aside, I want to have someone in the White House who is truly pro-space.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-03-2012 02:12 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
With the Iowa caucuses tonight, The Space Review's Jeff Foust has published a summary of the Republican candidates' positions on space.
The Space Review contacted all seven campaigns last month and provided them with a brief list of questions regarding their views on civil and military space policy, including what, if anything, they would do differently if elected president in November. Unfortunately, none of the seven campaigns responded by the time this article was prepared for publication. Instead, this article will instead focus on what the public statements and voting records of the candidates reveal about their space positions — which, in most cases, is very little.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-22-2012 07:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Today (Jan. 22) on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich said he would be giving a major speech on space later this week in Florida.
I'll be at the Space Coast in Florida this week giving a speech, a visionary speech, on the United States going back into space in the John F. Kennedy tradition rather than the current bureaucracy.
Florida Today reports that Gingrich has two appearances on the Space Coast on Wednesday (Jan. 25), attending a "'Space & Technology Roundtable' with Leaders of the Space Community" and, later, a town hall meeting in Cocoa, Florida.

According to the same article, another candidate, Rick Santorum, will also speak on the Space Coast on Saturday (Jan. 28). [via Space Politics]

alanh_7
Member

Posts: 1252
From: Ajax, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 01-23-2012 08:17 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for alanh_7   Click Here to Email alanh_7     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Maybe I should not say anything since I am a not a U.S citizen. But seems to me the only time the political types — no matter which side party they run for — have an interest in the space program only when there are votes to be had. And then when they take power they do advanced studies that will allow them to justify spending and job cuts.

AJ
Member

Posts: 511
From: Plattsburgh, NY, United States
Registered: Feb 2009

posted 01-23-2012 09:40 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AJ   Click Here to Email AJ     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yup, you pretty much summed it up. I'd bet good, hard cash that 99% of candidates don't give a damn about space exploration, except when it can help sway votes. It's like that with a lot of issues. Just depends on what state they happen to be in.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-23-2012 09:49 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Gingrich has been a member of the National Space Society's Board of Governors for years, dating (at least) back to when I worked there in the mid-1990s.

So while I don't disagree that his speeches this week are aimed squarely at picking up votes in the Florida primary, he does seem to have a personal interest in space. I think I would describe him as pro-space, but not necessarily pro-NASA.

Jay Chladek
Member

Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007

posted 01-23-2012 11:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jay Chladek   Click Here to Email Jay Chladek     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, one thing that makes space a little different in this election year is it is somewhat tied to defense expenditures as well. Without shuttle operations to help reduce the costs for some of the hardware (spare parts I believe) used by both NASA and the DoD, the costs of doing things by the Air Force goes up. As I recall, the Air Force and DoD were not exactly too keen on when Constellation got the axe. I can't recall exactly what their prime gripe was on that front.

cspg
Member

Posts: 6210
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006

posted 01-23-2012 01:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for cspg   Click Here to Email cspg     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jay Chladek:
As I recall, the Air Force and DoD were not exactly too keen on when Constellation got the axe. I can't recall exactly what their prime gripe was on that front.
Something to do with the production of solid rocket fuel?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-23-2012 01:20 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jay Chladek:
Well, one thing that makes space a little different in this election year is it is somewhat tied to defense expenditures as well.
I would say that is too "inside baseball" to be a concern for most voters and as a result, be of little influence to the candidates.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 01-23-2012 02:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If you have read my posts before, you probably know that I expect little from politicians coming out with a "no one loves the space program more than me" speech. Let me guess how Santorum or Gingrich will go — anti-NASA (let's get rid of it), pro-private enterprise, goals that sound good but won't happen in our lifetime. Translation: let's end it with a smile and a promise standing behind the flag. Reality — thankfully we have our memories.

Rick Boos
Member

Posts: 851
From: Celina, Ohio
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 01-23-2012 03:51 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rick Boos   Click Here to Email Rick Boos     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I just heard on the Sean Hannity radio show (January 23, 2012 4:00 p.m.) that Newt Gingrich will be addressing the Space Coast later this week about job creation. This could be interesting and insightful on his stance, and or inspire the other candidates to show their hand.

Blackarrow
Member

Posts: 3118
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 01-23-2012 05:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Blackarrow     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Didn't a candidate called Obama do the same four years ago?

chet
Member

Posts: 1506
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-23-2012 05:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for chet   Click Here to Email chet     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Of all the major candidates of EITHER party, Gingrich seems the only one to whom the label "futurist" might somewhat apply.

I'm not endorsing Gingrich and could think of many reasons NOT to vote for him, but he's the one I could most see as someone with the "vision thing" as far as NASA and our country's space program is concerned.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-23-2012 06:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Blackarrow:
Didn't a candidate called Obama do the same four years ago?
This thread is about the GOP presidential candidates, so I don't want to change the focus to President Obama, but the current issue of The New Yorker discusses Obama's campaign promises versus what was possible in light of the economy, illustrating why it is unrealistic to hold any candidate to what is said on the trail.
When it came time for Obama to write his fiscal 2011 budget, which was his next big opportunity to help the economy, he began to chip away at some dramatic campaign commitments. For instance, in 2008 he had promised a bold space program. "As President," he had said, "I will establish a robust and balanced civilian space program" that "not only will inspire the world with both human and robotic space exploration but also will again lead in confronting the challenges we face here on Earth, including global climate change, energy independence, and aeronautics research." In November, 2009, his advisers, in a memo, delivered some bad news: "The 10-year deficit has deteriorated by roughly $6 trillion." The next sentence was in boldface type and underlined: "Especially in light of our new fiscal context, it is not possible to achieve the inspiring space program goals discussed during the campaign."

Obama was told that he should cancel NASA's Bush-era Constellation program, along with its support projects, like the Ares launch vehicles, which were designed to return astronauts to the moon by 2020. The program was behind schedule, over budget, and "unachievable." He agreed to end it.

Again, I raise this not to debate what President Obama could have or should have done, but rather as an example of how all campaign pledges have to compete with the realities of the economy when it comes time to be implemented.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-23-2012 10:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich fielded questions about space exploration and the future direction of NASA during Monday (Jan. 23) night's debate in Tampa, Florida (Rick Santorum and Ron Paul were not given the chance to respond). [via]
Gov. Romney, this is the state that put the first man on the Moon. America right now has no way to put people into space except to hitch a ride with the Russians. Meanwhile, the Chinese are ramping up their space program. At a time when you all want to shrink federal spending, should space exploration be a priority?

Romney: It should certainly be a priority. What we have right now is a president who does not have a vision or a mission for NASA. And as a result of that, there are people on the Space Coast that are suffering, and Florida itself is suffering as a result.

So what's the right way forward? Well I happen to believe our space program is important not only for science but also for commercial development and for military development. And I believe the right mission for NASA should be determined by a president together with a collection of people from those different areas: from NASA, from the Air Force space program, from our leading universities, and from commercial enterprises.

Bring them together, discuss a wide range of options for NASA, and then have NASA not just funded by the federal government, but also by commercial enterprises, have some of the research done in our universities, let's have a collaborative effort with business, with government, with the military, as well as with their educational institutions, have a mission that once again excites our young people about the potential of space and the commercial potential will pay for itself down the road.

This is a great opportunity. Florida has technology, the people here on the Space Coast have technology and vision and passion that America needs. And with a president who is actually willing to create a mission and a vision for NASA and for space, we can continue to lead the world.

The moderator followed up with a question to Gingrich.
Would you put more tax dollars into the space race to commit to putting an American on Mars instead of relying on the private sector?

Gingrich: The two are not incompatible. For example, most of the great breakthroughs in aviation in the 20s and 30s were the result of prizes. Lindbergh flew to Paris for a $25,000 prize.

I would like to see vastly more the money spent encouraging the private sector into very aggressive experimentation, and I'd like to see a leaner NASA. I don't think building a bigger bureaucracy and having a greater number of people sit in rooms and talk gets you there.

But if we had a series of goals that we were prepared to offer prizes for, there's every reason to believe that you'd have a lot of folks in this country and around the world who would put up an amazing amount of money and would make the Space Coast literally hum with activity because they’d be drawn to achieve these prizes: going back to the Moon permanently, getting to Mars as rapidly as possible, building a series of space stations and developing commercial space. There are a whole series of things we could do that could be dynamic that are more than just better government bureaucracy.

They're fundamentally leapfrogging into a world where you're incentivizing people who are visionaries and people in the private sector to invest very large amounts of money and finding a very romantic and exciting future.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1586
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 01-24-2012 07:04 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Very nice statements about the space effort by both — as expected, it was positive and sweet but nothing much more than that.

As for what the President did a few years ago, that's like beating a dead horse. I still question why the program wasn't modified or streamlined the way other federal programs that are over-budget are. Constellation was cancelled but weapons systems live forever. Just depends on who your advisors and contributors are.

AJ
Member

Posts: 511
From: Plattsburgh, NY, United States
Registered: Feb 2009

posted 01-24-2012 02:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AJ   Click Here to Email AJ     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think Romney's point (which was said in a delightfully roundabout way) that NASA doesn't and shouldn't have the monopoly on American space exploration was a very good one. Granted, it wasn't an actual plan, but it wasn't bad!

Honestly, I thought Gingrich's comment to be especially pointless. There already are prizes (and have been) for aerospace vehicles and to have further prizes isn't necessarily going to draw those people to Florida. So while it might sound nice, I personally found it to be pretty boring.

AJ
Member

Posts: 511
From: Plattsburgh, NY, United States
Registered: Feb 2009

posted 01-24-2012 02:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AJ   Click Here to Email AJ     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Fra Mauro:
I still question why the program wasn't modified or streamlined the way other federal programs that are over-budget are.
Look at the James Webb Space Telescope. It seems that when it comes to aerospace, modification and streamlining are not words that are often used, if at all.

Aztecdoug
Member

Posts: 1405
From: Huntington Beach
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 01-24-2012 02:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aztecdoug   Click Here to Email Aztecdoug     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I didn't realize Florida had put the first Man on the Moon.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-24-2012 02:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by AJ:
Granted, it wasn't an actual plan, but it wasn't bad!
I guess it all depends on your perspective.
I believe the right mission for NASA should be determined by a president together with a collection of people from those different areas: from NASA, from the Air Force space program, from our leading universities, and from commercial enterprises.
What Romney proposes is nothing new. Remember the Augustine commission? Or as cited recently by Eric Berger at the Houston Chronicle:
Since 1969, 24 blue-ribbon panels have (re)assessed HSF [human spaceflight] strategy, and exploration concepts and technologies...
Shouldn't Romney (or any of the candidates) be able to take the results of those 24 committees, including Augustine, and settle on a plan? Is another committee really necessary?

Cliff Lentz
Member

Posts: 655
From: Philadelphia, PA USA
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 01-24-2012 03:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Cliff Lentz   Click Here to Email Cliff Lentz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It just seems to me that Obama was in that all too familiar rock and hard place location. Spend more money on space exploration and you rile up the Tea Partiers — cut funds and you put people out of work in Florida (and across the country). There's really no win here and regardless of the political posturing, no one has a way to do this!

Aztecdoug
Member

Posts: 1405
From: Huntington Beach
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 01-24-2012 03:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aztecdoug   Click Here to Email Aztecdoug     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well as the old sayings go, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Sometimes you just have to stick to your guns, or convictions, and do what you think is right. That is why we elect people to office, to make the hard decisions.

AJ
Member

Posts: 511
From: Plattsburgh, NY, United States
Registered: Feb 2009

posted 01-24-2012 05:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AJ   Click Here to Email AJ     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I totally, absolutely agree with Doug. Some decisions aren't the most popular decisions, but they have to be made. I don't know that there is a solution here, really, which is in itself discouraging.

And Robert, I get your point and you're right. It's not a new idea, but it's a practical one. I still prefer it to Gingrich's. What we need is a solution. But like I said, i don't know that there is one.


This topic is 3 pages long:   1  2  3 

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Open Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement