I don’t understand where this talk about a return of Mike Griffin is coming from. I’d be very surprised if either Bob Walker or Mark Albrecht would recommend that.
[Update a few minutes later]
Not space related, but here is a report on potential cabinet members. Needless to say, I’m not as hair on fire as Jerry Coyne is. Bolton would be a good choice for Secretary of State. I think that Corker would be a disaster. Not sure about Newt.
I think, from a space perspective, the worst thing about the Trump win is that Jeff Sessions has been such a close supporter. If he becomes head of OMB, killing off SLS will be impossible, unless we can come up with something more useful for Marshall to do.
I don’t understand where this talk about a return of Mike Griffin is coming from.
From me.
I don’t understand where this talk about a return of Mike Griffin is coming from.
Probably just because he was in the last Republican administration.
Trump ran outside the existing power structure but he has many moderate establishment type views on the role of government. It should be interesting to see who he picks at NASA and other positions.
We’ll have to see if the Hill decides to be more partisan, supporting a new Republican President’s space agenda, or whether parochial interests carry the day. It will likely be a bit of both – partisan on Earth sciences and parochial on district pork.
Could be but NOAA is a good fit for earth sciences. Its not like those missions would be eliminated.
Dealing with the pork will be hard but at some point, reality has to intrude.
Coordinating the various missions and programs so they support a larger goal is also a good thing.
“I think, from a space perspective, the worst thing about the Trump win is that Jeff Sessions has been such a close supporter. If he becomes head of OMB, killing off SLS will be impossible, unless we can come up with something more useful for Marshall to do.”
There are *plenty* of things the line engineers at Marshall could do to boost human settlement of the Solar System. The problem? None of the upper level managers at Marshall have much experience with anything but big rockets to launch stuff from Earth, ever since the coat-holders for the Peenemunde Team took over in the 1970s.
It is these upper level managers who talk to Senate staffers most regularly, not line engineers. It is these upper levels managers who would not be nearly as competitive to be picked for running projects like a Space Tug, or an ISRU processing plant, or ………, other than big launchers from the surface of the Earth. That is one of the reasons why the committee chairs demanded a large launcher.
In addition, at the level of the Senators and Congressmen themselves, a small number of large line item projects is less costly in political capital than a large number of small line item projects for the same amount of money flowing into their districts. Politicians build their careers on votes and political capital. Any Alabama pol will find large launchers contribute the most to both those categories.
This is one good reason why I’d support Jeff Sessions as Head of Homeland Security.
I don’t know the answer to this, but it would seem that it would depend on how Trump takes on his management task. For example, the story is told that his father would collect nails at construction sites and put them back in the bin. Trump might ask himself why government makes anything the private sector also makes strongly suggesting a focus on competitive bidding to get costs down. I’m certain he believes the government wastes a fortune in this way and will actively look for how these costs can be cut.
He would consider but be less inclined to give consideration to job impact unless the issue is thrown in his face. In that case, he’s likely to defer and go on to another issue. But jobs for jobs sake would highly annoy him.
It would be normal for him as a business man to sort all costs by size and tackle them in order from largest to smallest. This is strongly suggested by his emphasis on energy policy which has an impact on most everything else.
Once again, I think Rand would make a good NASA head. I would bet that’s exactly the kind of shakeup that would appeal to Trump. How would we make that suggestion to the right people? If chosen would he serve?
What have I ever done to you to deserve that?
That is exactly the attitude that is required.
I’d put Lori Garver’s name at the top of the list, followed by Jeff Greason.
Jeff would be good.
I totally agree that *Lori Garver* should be at the head of the list of potential NASA Administrators!
Make it Marvin (me!) If I didn’t get fired immediately I’d have thousands of colonists in the solar system (not just mars) in the next 20 years. Otherwise we might only see a dozen just visiting during that time.
Better, just give me one year of the SLS/Orion budget and not another penny and I’d still do it… and I myself wouldn’t have to build a single thing. Commercial vendors just need coordinated efforts.
Why would Bolton be a good choice? He hasn’t had a hit since One World One Love in 2009.
I didn’t know John Bolton could carry a tune?
Technically, it is the mustache that sings.
It does have its own SSN.
https://www.greatagain.gov/serve-america.html
OK, Ken, if you want the job, here’s how to apply.
And to Jeff Greason, who I know reads this blog: please seriously consider sending in an application to be NASA Administrator.
One does not submit an application to be NASA administrator.
That’s a .gov site. Apparently things have changed now that a businessman is running things instead of a politician. Now if you want to work in the Trump administration, you have to apply for the job. That includes Cabinet positions and ambassadorships, and NASA Administrator is a couple steps below that level.