A new candidate for NASA administrator, according to NASAWatch.

There is nothing in his resume that makes me think that he understands anything at all about space policy issues, and the fact that he’s worked with Hans Mark gives me the heebies, if not full jeebies.

As for this quote:

The general also has some strong views of his own: ‘I believe if you could get rid of all the nuclear weapons this would be a wonderful world,’ he says.”

I wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment, as far as it goes, but what does it imply in terms of his beliefs and potential acts? Does he think this is an attainable goal, or is it some out-of-context quote about what he’d do if he had a magic wand? If the former, what policies would he promote to achieve it (not that NASA administrator has much to do with that)?

There is nothing here that gives me a good feeling about this potential pick. Not that the Obama administration cares what I think, of course.

[Update a few minutes later]

I know, you’re asking, “what’s the problem with Hans Mark?”

The trivial reason is that he was the one who recommended Mike Griffin to the Bush administration. A more substantive one is that he has made many statements, or at least implications, over the years that private citizens have no business being in space, and that it’s a realm only for government astronauts. Which would be in keeping with his German upbringing and long NASA pedigree. He is a government space man, first, last, always.

[One more before-bed thought]

The general is reportedly very close to the president elect. That can either be very good, or very bad, depending on just what it is he/they want to do. The last time we had a NASA administrator close to the president, it worked out pretty well (Jim Webb, Apollo). Whatever he wants to do, he can count on White House support from the top, if he gets the job. The question remains: what will the Obama space policy be?

[Wednesday morning update]

Mark Whittington once again displays his complete inability to sanely read the emotions of other people. It’s nutty to think that I’m in a “blind panic.” It’s just as dumb when he claims that I’m “full of rage,” or any of the other extreme emotions that he often misattributes to me. But that’s Mark — perhaps he’s just projecting or something.

And Jeff Foust has more on the potential pick.

[Bumped]

[Early afternoon update]

FWIW, there’s an interesting comment over at NASAWatch, from someone who calls himself “Space Exec”:

It’s well known that Gration was angling for a top job in the Department of Defense in the Obama Administration. During the campaign he had an opportunity to be involved in creating Obama’s space policy, but barely engaged due to lack of interest and quickly pivoted over to other things – leaving the job to 20-something policy staffer Carlos Monje instead.

If he’s appointed, the signal sent to the entire space community will be that NASA is nothing more than a consolation prize for the Presidents’ buddy who couldn’t get the job he wanted. Or, at best, maybe NASA is some kind of training wheels for Gration to prove his management abilities.

How soon until he has his eyes on some of the slots at DoD that will be opening up when Gates leaves (Secretary of the Air Force, for example)? Is he really going to be effective if his term is only one or two years? Is he going to have the respect of the NASA team given his apparent lack of interest in space science or exploration?

If this is the case, it reminds me of the Frosch appointment during the Carter administration. Bob Frosch reportedly wanted to run NOAA (something for which his previous career better suited him) but that post went to someone in more political favor, and he ended up with NASA as a consolation prize. We don’t need someone at the agency right now with little previous interest in space, and whose eyes are on a bigger (in his mind) prize. But we’ll see.

[Bumped again]

[Mid-afternoon update]

I’ve verified the Frosch story. It’s actually very interesting.

OK, I was going to comment on the space portion of the president’s interview as well:

Q: Over the last eight years, they’ve had to make some decisions on priorities and spending. I was wondering how you assess how well NASA has done during your presidency and what do you think lies ahead for space exploration, and particularly manned space exploration.

THE PRESIDENT: I was very concerned about the dwindling enthusiasm for NASA when I first got here. And the reason why — and so we did a whole study of NASA and its future, and it became apparent to me that the space shuttle was losing its glamour and, frankly, people weren’t convinced of its necessity. And the space station was important, but it just didn’t have — the mission itself didn’t capture a lot of folks — the imagination of a lot of folks in Congress.

And so we changed the mission, as you know, of NASA. We said we’re going to stop flying the shuttle in 2010 and develop a Orion rocket or Orion launching vehicle to go to the moon, to get back to lunar exploration. And the purpose there is to eventually settle in and develop enough facility in the Moon to then be able to go beyond.

And so my first purpose on the NASA issue was to develop a mission that would excite the scientists, the employees, and the Congress. That has been accomplished. I know there is a gap that concerns people, and that would be the gap between the last shuttle and the beginning of the new Orion rocket program. Nevertheless, I do think it’s — the mission has to be very relevant. And so I’ve been a believer in NASA and space exploration since I’ve been the President, and I’m excited about the new mission.

I’d say first that he didn’t seem to think it necessary to excite the American people — just the “scientists” (whatever he means by that), the “employees” (of NASA? of the contractors? all of the above?) and the Congress. Perhaps, though, that was an oversight. I do think, though, that it reveals a conventional mindset — that space is about “science.” It also reveals that he is a) familiar with the broad outlines of the plan that he announced exactly five years ago (was it really that long?) on Wednesday and that b) he is familiar with only the broad outlines. He knows that the capsule has been since named Orion, and either doesn’t know, or has forgotten the name of the launcher (Ares).

I don’t think that this is a reflection on his intelligence so much as his focus. There have been arguments over at Space Politics over how much culpability the administration has in the developing disaster of ESAS/Constellation/whatever, since the new policy was announced half a decade ago. It is certainly not in keeping with either the Aldridge Commission recommendations (as I remind my readers on probably more than a weekly basis), nor with the goals stated by John Marburger (the White House science adviser) to bring the solar system within the economic sphere of humanity.

I agree that ultimately the buck stops in the Oval Office, and that the Bush administration is responsible for letting NASA drop the ball by not supervising them sufficiently. But I disagree with those who say that it has engaged in a crime of commission (i.e., it actually actively directed and approved the current direction), rather than omission (just not paying much attention). I believe that it was the latter, and I think that the president’s statement is evidence for that. They were forced to divert themselves from more pressing issues in 2003 to focus on space policy as a result of the loss of Columbia (now almost six years ago at the beginning of next month). They came up with new policy, and then, a little over a year later, hired a new administrator to implement it.

He came highly credentialed and recommended. They thought that once he was in place, they could go refocus on more pressing issues They expected him to do it right, and didn’t want or expect to have to look over his shoulder to make sure that he did, particularly when he was supposed to be the expert rocket scientist. As a result, Mike Griffin had free reign to drive the program into the ditch, with little attention or interference from the White House.

And once again, we see that civil space is unimportant. I’d like to Hope that this will Change in the new administration. Well, I do hope so. But I don’t expect it.