Posted on 07/21/2018 6:52:31 AM PDT by Kaslin
It’s not often you hear Ted Cruz support keeping a government research program alive when the administration wants to defund it and turn it over to the private sector, but that is what is happening with the International Space Station. And Cruz has a solid case.
The administration announced earlier this year it wants to end direct funding to the space station by 2025 – three years ahead of schedule. Jim Bridenstine, the former congressman from Oklahoma who is now NASA administrator, said he is talking to companies about forming a consortium to operate the space station after the government funding runs out.
NASA spends $3 billion to $4 billion a year to operate the space station in an international partnership that includes Russia, Japan, Canada and the European Space Agency. The International Space Station, the largest object humans have ever put into space, flies 250 miles above the Earth’s surface and has been inhabited by astronauts continuously since 2000.
Astronauts study health and technology aboard the station with a focus now on how time in space affects humans with an eye toward deep-space exploration and long-term space occupation. It studies long-term changes to the body from being in space, such as why many of those who spend time there saying their eyesight is altered permanently.
Technology research was key to espresso machines and 3D printers, among other products.
Current plans call for the space station to be funded at least through 2024 with a proposal to extend it to 2028. After that, it could be de-orbited or recycled for future use.
Cruz, the Republican senator from Texas, blamed the decision on “numskulls” in the Office of Management and Budget. He and others traced a variety of challenges that would come with the decision.
First, Cruz is concerned no one will step up to partner with the government because of limited commercial opportunities and the complicated nature of joining a project that involves multiple national governments.
Paul Martin, NASA’s Inspector General, shared Cruz’s concern about the commercial potential.
“We question whether a sufficient business case exists under which private companies can create a self-sustaining and profit-making business using the International Space Station independent of significant government funding,” Martin said. “The scant commercial interest shown in the station over its nearly 20 years of operation gives us pause about the agency’s current plans.
Bridenstine admits companies might find it “hard to close the business case.”
Even if sufficient commercial interest existed, Martin said, NASA still would have to pay to use the station to complete research projects, including studies of how to transport humans into deep space. Martin said at least six of the 20 health risk research projects now going on and four of 40 technology research projects would not be completed before the government turned over control in 2024, as the proposal calls for.
Frank Slazer, vice president of space systems for the Aerospace Industries Association, backed up the other point.
“It will be very hard to turn ISS into a truly commercial outpost because of the international agreements that the United States is involved in,” Slazer told the Washington Post. “It’s inherently always going to be an international construct that requires U.S. government involvement and multinational cooperation.
Cruz has suggested something beyond science, commercial interests or even the perpetual conservative itch to privatize government may be afoot and that it is not worth courting a possible gap in US research capability to save what might amount to as little as $1 billion.
He also said at a recent hearing on the topic that he opposes the administration initiative and intends to keep working for funding for the program.
“Nowhere in federal statute is there a request from Congress seeking a hard deadline to end federal support for ISS,” said Cruz. “Permanently canceling a program for political reasons costs job and wastes billions of dollars. We cannot afford to continue to pursue policies that have consequences in creating gaps in capability, that send $3 ½ billion in taxpayer money to the Russian government, or that create a leadership vacuum in low-earth orbit that provides a window of opportunity for the Chinese to capitalize on it.”
China, he noted, will have its own manned space station by 2022.
Lawmakers are right to look for places where commercial interests can perform government functions and deliver government services. But they also are right to – as Cruz has in this case – carefully examine each idea to make sure it is appropriate.
In this case, the administration doesn’t have a viable alternative to propose. It’s not even a given sufficient commercial opportunities exist. There is time to sort this out. And there is no reason to end funding now.
The US Government had a monopoly on space. Now, it doesn’t.
We should not pay extra for this. Let private companies do so.
Well thank goodness for Texas he's bringing home the bacon, can't have him being a total putz about everything.
Extra? You totally misunderstand the role of Gov here - it is for them to pioneer the tech so that ‘companies’, as you put it, can take over. Barring that, the Chinese, Russians, Indians, and Europeans will usurp the high ground while some are busy pinching pennies. And the US will fall to 3rd of 4th level in the world. Once that happens there is no coming back. That was also Obama’s plan which is what DJT wants to overturn, but without conservative support, its Obama all the way to the bottom.
“You totally misunderstand the role of Gov here - it is for them to pioneer the tech so that ‘companies’, as you put it, can take over.”
I am a Consevative. You are a RINO.
I am a Consevative. You are a RINO.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if we knew about what’s actually happening in space and where some of those black project trillion$ went, no one would be talking about the ISS.
Do it, take it from the Congressional pension fund.
Nope - as stated in our Declaration of Independence, the role of government is to secure men's rights. Pioneering tech is the role of investors spending their own money (or money voluntarily given over to their care).
Re: “Cruz is concerned no one will step up to partner with the government because of limited commercial opportunities.”
There are NO commercial opportunities, except space tourism and rocket thrill rides.
And it will take centuries before human tourists can safely and comfortably sight see around our solar system.
I completely support basic scientific research.
But NASA needs to channel ALL its funding into robotic telescopes, orbiters, landers, and sample returns.
I, Representative, declare the Space Shuttle a paper weight.
Let it fall back as a July 4th light show.
CUT DEAD WEIGHT.
Maybe Cruz does, maybe he doesn’t. It all comes down to NASA jobs in Houston. That’s what he really cares about.
The dog didn’t do anything.
Nope - as stated in our Declaration of Independence, the role of government is to secure men’s rights.
—
Men have a right, as you put it, to have their ‘rights’ secure in space also. Other than that, you are thinking penny-wise and pound foolish quibbling about a few billion in a multi-trillion dollar economy.
And continue to misunderstand what role the Government actually plays. You do know that the US government played a large role in opening up the West? Perhaps it would have been better for the settlers to raise their own armies and build their own forts under corporate logos?
Corporations in space need to raise their own defenses against Russian and Chinese military space forces according to your idea. Corporations need to defend the US communications and GPS grid against all comers. I guess. It goes on ...
You are neglecting to take into consideration the huge and rapid advances in all realms of technology which came directly out of the US manned space program. While some will argue that those things would have happened anyway - which in my opinion is fanciful thinking and a weak argument.
How many more decades and centuries would it have taken absent the US space program to achieve all that we did in 10-20 years? Would all of those advances have happened in Russia or China in their space programs? What would the US look like now had the Russian and Chinese made those discoveries and advances?
Manned space exploration is very risky. There will always be a need for the government to contribute many dollars to space exploration initiatives that benefit all mankind. The government (NASA) is ultimately responsible to identify and correct the cause of mishaps.
As the government provides needed resources while distancing itself from oversight, there is added risk that NASA will be unable to get back on track when a serious setback occurs. They will have little or no in-house experience and expertise.
Build a new one and we own it
Build others at La Grange points
Take the high ground. Space Force
Thanks, nice to hear from someone other than an FR curmudgeon.
Which in no way implies a "right" to force unwilling parties to pay for space activities.
Other than that, you are thinking penny-wise and pound foolish quibbling about a few billion in a multi-trillion dollar economy.
If it's such a puny amount, all the more reason to look to that multi-trillion dollar private sector to come up with it.
Corporations in space need to raise their own defenses against Russian and Chinese military space forces according to your idea. Corporations need to defend the US communications and GPS grid against all comers.
No, that's your straw man - I support defense spending wherever defense is needed.
You are neglecting to take into consideration the huge and rapid advances in all realms of technology which came directly out of the US manned space program. While some will argue that those things would have happened anyway - which in my opinion is fanciful thinking and a weak argument.
They don't have to prove it's true - if you want to pick their pockets for your pet program, you have to prove it's false, just as a first step.
You mean the taxpayer.
to contribute many dollars to space exploration initiatives that benefit all mankind.
Textbook socialism.
Right! its time to feed the homeless and shelter the poor; snowflakes need more safe spaces.
The heck with Hope, Exploration that this country was founded on. It costs too much.
Let China, Russia, Europe, Japan, and India take the lead. We need to become Obama’s image of a third world country. Let’s go for it!
I see that you do not support taxpayer financed R&D.
What is the appropriate role, if any, for government sponsored research and development?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.