Candidates short-sighted on space
John Kelly - Florida Today (Viewpoint)
The good news: Presidential candidates are paying attention to space as they campaign in Florida.
The bad news? The candidates who have plans are short on details. Some consider space exploration a luxury we can’t afford. Most, and maybe all, of the candidates don’t have even a loose grasp on United States space policy.
Let’s hope nobody is casting their vote for president based solely on space issues. But, if your vote might be influenced, here’s what we’ve heard from each candidate, plus some reality checking.
Newt Gingrich gave space the most attention. Recent presidents and NASA leaders are being too timid. While saying he agrees with the current White House policy to invest money to spur private space companies’ developments, he’s also pitching a big, bodacious, expensive Apollo-esque plan that could potentially cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.
Gingrich pledged to shake up the NASA bureaucracy, speed development and colonize the moon by the end of his second term — 2020. He said he’d focus scientists and engineers on propulsion technology that would make trips to Mars possible. Ten percent of NASA’s budget would go to prizes that would spur private developers to help overcome the big hurdles to deep space travel.
The details are shaky. That grand a plan, at Gingrich’s pace, costs big bucks. No U.S. president since John F. Kennedy has gotten Congress to devote truckloads of cash to space exploration. Gingrich said he would use political capital to force Congress to go along. He also suggested the private sector could be enticed to foot a big part of the bill.
Problem: He hasn’t said how he’d pull off either.
Mike McCulley, ex-astronaut and former chief executive of United Space Alliance noted the U.S. has what seemed like bold space plans under past presidents. Over the course of President George W. Bush’s second term and President Barack Obama’s first term, after tens of billions of dollars spent, “eight years later, we don’t have a helluva lot to show for it.” What McCulley meant: Big space goals aren’t met just by grandiose speeches.
Mitt Romney called Gingrich’s plan to colonize the moon a waste of tax money. Romney says he would gather leaders from NASA, the military, private companies and academia to study NASA priorities. “I'd like to come together and talk about different options and the cost,” he said. In short, he has no plan. The U.S. doesn’t need another blue-ribbon task force to repeat the paralysis by analysis of the past eight years. Likely end: another dust-gathering study and little to show for it.
Ron Paul voted repeatedly against space projects while in Congress. In Thursday’s debate, he reiterated his position. “I would be very reluctant” to invest in human exploration, he said, “but space technology should be followed up to some degree for national defense purposes, but not just for the fun of it.”
Rick Santorum characterized space exploration as an expensive luxury. “The idea that anybody's going out and talking about brand new, very expensive schemes to spend more money at a time when we do not have our fiscal house in order, in my opinion, is playing crass politics and not being realistic with the people of this country as to the nature and gravity of the problem,” Santorum said this past week.
He added: “NASA and the Space Coast and Houston, Alabama, all of those places that have done remarkable work are huge assets to the country, but there are other huge assets in the country too.” So, expect a President Santorum to scale back space spending
No comments:
Post a Comment