Yes, it’s an ongoing mess.
[Wednesday-morning update]
Yes, putting a nuclear reactor (in fact, several of them) on the Moon is a great idea, but it’s out of context with the policy mess. If we want to put reactors on the Moon, we have to come up with a scalable, affordable transportation infrastructure to get not only them, but lots of things there. We don’t currently have one, and no one in the administration seems to be concerned about it.
How about a court-appointed executor to wrap up NASA’s affairs?
The MLP would make a heck of a flag-pole. For the right price…
Seems to me the problem here is Senate Democrats.
Partially, but they’re not preventing him from nominating a new NASA administrator, or setting up the space council.
I don’t necessarily agree with the premise of the article. There’s a lot more wrong with the country than NASA. Trump’s political; capital is far from unlimited.
How much political capital does it take to reestablish the space council, or name a NASA administrator?
Rand you didn’t need to add “Space policy” to the title of this post it still be accurate.
Thank you so much for that idiocy.
Space is not important™
Duffy is making a decision here, another there, with no apparent coherency. Which is to be expected. That coherency is precisely the greatest loss with the loss of Isaacson, who had spent a lot of time preparing to be the full-time Administrator.
Not only won’t it be possible to “beat” China in the “short game” under these conditions, but more importantly, we won’t outdo it by showing that public/private partnerships and well-crafted frameworks can bring down costs and accelerate activity in the slightly longer game.
Eventually, the feds may pay Elon for a lunar “show the flag” trip
But what will fuel those lunar reactors? Let’s hope it isn’t governmentium.