It looks like (contrary to the idiotic claims that there was “widespread opposition” in Congress to the new direction for human spaceflight) Bart Gordon is having trouble selling his porkfest to “aggrieved” representatives outside the committee:
In a July 21 letter to Gordon, 13 California Democrats urged the committee to restore funding for commercial crew and cargo initiatives and exploration technology programs requested in Obama’s 2011 spending plan.
“These reductions will have a serious effect on California’s workforce and economy, and that of many states,” states the letter, which was spearheaded by Rep. Anna Eshoo, a Silicon Valley Democrat who has worked closely with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on energy and technology policy initiatives in Congress. “These are areas that should be the cornerstone of NASA’s new direction because they will drive innovation and job creation across the nation.”
It’s nice to see the California delegation finally acting like they give a damn about space, after all of the jobs they allowed NASA to move to Florida, Alabama and Texas in the nineties. I assume that some of this is a result of successful lobbying by SpaceX.
So let me see if I have this straight. When tax money is given to Orion/Ares it’s a “pork fest” and when it’s given to SpaceX it’s “giving a damn about space”
Just so everyone knows where I stand, I don’t think that money should be given to Constellation, Ares, Orion, or SpaceX and if someone forced me to pick between the President, Senate or the House plan, I’d pick the President’s plan.
When tax money is given to Orion/Ares it’s a “pork fest” and when it’s given to SpaceX it’s “giving a damn about space”
Yes, you have it straight. Orion/Ares is a cost-plus jobs program. Money that goes to SpaceX (and Orbital) is fixed price for stipulated useful milestones. Commercial Crew will be done on the same basis.
“Money that goes to SpaceX (and Orbital) is fixed price…”
Fair enough, I just can’t support taking money from one group of people and donating it to someone else’s hobby/cause, fixed price or otherwise (e.g. publically funded football stadiums). If you’re not careful the next thing you know someone will suggest it’s OK to take money from one group of people to pay for another group of people’s health care.
… Or, heaven forbid, take money from one group of people to pay for another group of people’s unemployment insurance. (As long as we’re off topic 😉 That’s what governments do: facilitate the funding of enterprises that are considered important for the common welfare. If you don’t think spaceflight (or sports stadiums, or health care, or unemployment insurance) advances the common welfare, then you probably wouldn’t want to vote for that. But other people may disagree.
brian, does it not matter to you that SpaceX offers an equivalent service/product to Orion/Ares at a FRACTION of the cost?
If you’re not careful the next thing you know someone will suggest it’s OK to take money from one group of people to pay for another group of people’s health care.
What? Is that a serious attempt at an analogy comparing confiscatory tax policy to moving appropriations from one company to another? Money being appropriated to one company instead of another is not the same as taking money from one group of individuals and giving to other individuals for one very simple reason:
The money being moved from Orion/Ares to Falcon/Dragon never belonged to Orion/Ares in the first place!
That money is MY money, my tax dollars. And if moving it from one source of a particular service to another makes operational and financial good sense then so be it.
OK I am just a space Don Quixote but…
WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE:
To The Honorable Jeff Flake
I am a Mesa resident unemployed for 18 months. I have filed a patent application to replace the Space Shuttle with a uniquely efficient design. I have collaboration with ASU aero professors to seek a NASA grant for development here at our Gateway Airport campus. We will not find funding if the bill 5781 goes forward. We need private industry, not more NASA committee designed flying pork barrels. NASA leaders failed to heed their own engineers on two disastrous occasions. Now many NASA people are warning against another disaster. I do not question the credentials of NASA management; they are every bit as great as those of the captain of the Titanic. When those on the masthead yell “Iceberg!” it is time to turn the boat.
David Luther
Your representative is a flake? Wow, you got good representation.
Rand – why did all those jobs from Canoga Park, Huntington Beach, etc move to Houston and Huntsville? Labor Rates! People sold houses there in the LA area and bought much bigger houses here in Houston. Of course the weather is lousy but there is a price to pay.
The SpaceX work will also move sooner or later – to take advantage of Florida labor rates and convenient access to the work.
The only thing the California delegation could do is subsidize companies – which actually does happen in cost plus contracts but the Feds would rather subsidize lower cost companies in Texas, Alabama, and Florida. Rather than higher cost companies anywhere else. That is why rocket production moved out of San Diego and over to Alabama.
“That money is MY money, my tax dollars. And if moving it from one source of a particular service to another makes operational and financial good sense then so be it.”
This seems to wrap up my attitude on spaceflight as well. If somebody can get into space and deliver nearly the same goods at half or a third of the price than the “program on record”, why is it even a dispute to not make the switch?