...don't vote for John Kerry.

He claims that it's too expensive while simultaneously criticizing the administration for not devoting enough resources to it.

He's stuck in the eighties in terms of policy thinking:

Kerry’s emphasis on supporting microgravity research for the sake of improving life on Earth stands in contrast to the Bush Administration’s plans to focus space station research almost exclusively on knocking down the barriers to living and working in space for increasingly long stretches of time.

“I’m excited by potential advances in pharmaceuticals that microgravity could lead to,” Kerry wrote. “Unique drug treatments produced in the microgravity environment may play a vital role in reducing the cost of health care and in developing defenses against chemical and biological terrorist attacks.”

At current access costs, there's no market for microgravity pharmaceutical research (and it's not clear what value it will have even at much lower costs). This is as silly as the claims made for NASP and space station in the eighties that they would cure AIDS. Whatever the current political fashion is, is what's used to justify continuing high-tech welfare and pork.

He does have one criticism of the administration with which I agree, as far as it goes:

Kerry also criticized the Bush Administration for abandoning the hunt for low cost space transportation, a central goal of NASA during the 1990s.

“The most critical element of our space program should be reducing the costs and increasing the reliability of space transportation to and from low Earth orbit,” Kerry wrote. “This is just one of the many critical areas lost in the Bush initiative.”

The problem is, that he's defending the Clinton space policy, which leads one to suspect that if he were elected there would be more X-33s in our future. We need to reduce the cost of access, but NASA is constitutionally incapable of doing it. We need new policy, but not new technology, which is all NASA knows how to do.

Oh, and this gives me a warm feeling:

Kerry said he continues to seek advice on a variety of high-tech issues from a Science and Technology Committee he established early on in his campaign. That committee, he said, includes “several individuals with a strong background in the civil space arena.” Kerry did not identify his space advisors by name.

In other words, the same people who gave us the failed policies of the nineties.

It reminds me of the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

"We're putting our top men on it."

"Who?!"

"Top. Men."

Donkeys to whom space is important are going to have a tough choice this November.

[Update at 9:43 AM PDT]

There's a discussion of this over at Space Politics.

Here's a quote from Dwayne Day:

Space is low on the agenda for any candidate. But his statements at least make clear that the Vision for Space Exploration will not survive his election. That is more specific than I would have expected.

There is no way that a Republican Congress could enact the Vision with Kerry in the White House. It is simply impossible.

[One more thought]

I wish that Brian Berger had asked him some questions about alt-space, instead of just NASA. Does he support the new commercial space transportation legislation? Would he revive the Office of Commercial Space at Commerce? Is he excited about the Ansari X-Prize? Would he support government-funded prizes? Will he have anything to say on Monday after the flight?

Do his "Top. Men." even have awareness, or opinions about any of this?

I think the number of people for whom space is a dominant issue in choosing a candidate is not very large. I'm a spacehound by any definition, but space policy is about 10th on my list of criteria.

My impressions very much parallel Rand's, and here's what I advised my media clients:

1. Apropos of today's 'Space Commission' report, presidential candidate John Kerry has provided
space.com with detailed answers about how his space policy defers from Bush's.

2. The crisis in the American space program doesn't rate highly among public concerns,
but it clearly will be a secondary camapign issue this year.

3. Kerry criticized the Bush plan for being 'short on resources', that is, not asking for 'realistic funding',
or more money in the budget.

4. But when asked if he would increase NASA funding, Kerry evaded the question by saying that
"NASA funding decisions would be weighed against deficit reduction". So he basically criticized
Bush for a policy that he gave no indication he would change.

5. Kerry attributes the 'unpopular' decision to not fly a shuttle mission to repair the
Hubble Space Telescope' to NASA's stretched budget (he praised Clinton's management of NASA
even though the budget was reduced year by year). NASA chief O'Keefe has
explained the Hubble decision as based on safety considerations specified in the
Columbia Accident Investigation board's final report (I think this is correct).

6. Kerry criticized NASA's lack of interest in cheaper space transportation. The major project
to address this issue, the X-33 single-stage-to-orbit spaceplane, announced by Al Gore
in 1996 during a California election campaign, was later canceled when it proved
too expensive and too impractical.

7. Kerry supported the Clinton decision to invite the Russians into the space station program
(there's no evidence that the Bush space people disagree with this). But some outside
observers argue that the delays and extra expenses caused by this partnership
diverted money that had been allocated to improving space shuttle safety.

8. Kerry supports microgravity research ("I’m excited by potential advances in pharmaceuticals
that microgravity could lead to"), which NASA has been promising for decades would lead
to more powerful and cheaper medicines. So far it hasn't. Kerry wants NASA to keep trying.

9. Kerry stated that he gets advice from "a Science and Technology Committee" that includes
“several individuals with a strong background in the civil space arena.” But he wouldn't give any names.

WOW. Great minds really DO think alike...

Mine, too, Andrew, but in my case, it's just one more reason not to vote for Kerry.

I do not wish to execise my one and lonely vote for politicians versus this vision for neither is a perfect candidate. I want this vision to stand seperately from the governmental infuences if possible or at least with a check and balance system to protect it.
Think constitution, legislative,versus power of law making.

Harold, your wants are irrelevant, unfortunately. Government space programs will always be hostage to politics and politicians.

Then it is time for a change and that is what the commission report basically is saying...

There is nothing that the administration can do to change the fact that if Kerry wins, this initiative is dead, regardless of what the report says. Sorry.

You are assuming that the president will do nothing with the remainder of his term in office and as well to lossing his bid for office over the Iraq situation both of which have there chance of not holding true...

I am assuming nothing of the kind.

Bush v Kerry?

Will Bush support the Aldridge report himself?

Mars on the cover and shuttle C on page 29. Heck, if Bush give that his 100% support, maybe I will vote for him.

:-)

Hi there folks. I've just finished reading the Commission report and found this discussion via the Project Constellation website. Rand, remember you are taking at face value the words of a person who has demonstrated that he'll talk both sides of an issue if it'll give him room to criticize his opponent. Just like Bush's promise of bridging the partisan divide, Kerry, if elected, will not follow through on most of his campaign rhetoric.

A large part of the report was encouraging efforts to get the American people to own this project, not just President Bush. NASA needs to advertise on primetime television. It needs to show the commercial benefits of space research. It needs to embrace wholheartedly the efforts of private companies such as SpaceX and Scaled Composites. The idea that a President decides the success or failure of a particular space exploration goal is as antiquated as the Apollo-era infrastructure NASA launches from. NASA needs to be an independent organization with the vision and strength to maintain its own budget.

Rand, I don't think that Kerry would kill the initiatve or do any changes if he was elected president, as long as the changes proved to be popular. If it turns out the polls say voters like the initiative (and the commission report said the responses they received were 7 to 1 in favor), then Kerry will support the initiative.

I just wanted to clarify my comment about Kerry and a Republican or Democratic Congress. I was responding to the comment that a Republican Congress might be able to implement the VSE _even_ if Kerry is elected president. That is not possible. If Kerry decides to end the program, then it will end. There is no case, to my knowledge, where Congress has been able to enact a space program without the support of the president. Certainly no large program. That's the way that our system of government works.

...the commission report said the responses they received were 7 to 1 in favor...

That's meaningless. It wasn't a scientific poll--it was self selecting. It just means that the people who don't care didn't bother to respond.

Anthony wrote:

The idea that a President decides the success or failure of a particular space exploration goal is as antiquated as the Apollo-era infrastructure NASA launches from. NASA needs to be an independent organization with the vision and strength to maintain its own budget.

Even if that were politically feasible, the last thing we need is a NASA that's even less accountable than the current one. It would be even more of a disaster.

It seems to me that, for both space and Iraq and even the War On Terror (whatever the merits of any of these), many of Kerry's supporters seem to be making the argument:

Kerry will be just like Bush, only smarter.

If that's the case, exactly what is Mr. Kerry's appeal to those who don't like Dubya's policies? Is Kerry really simply "Dubya-Plus"??

Somehow, I doubt it.