Congressional Reps: Obama Plan is Unacceptable, Nonsensical Death March

Senators and Representatives from Texas, Alabama and Florida have all strongly decried President Barack Obama’s plan to cancel the Ares I and V rockets and NASA’s lunar program.

Florida Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith, Texas Rep. John Culberson and Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby have all ripped the plan. These politicians are all from states with a substantial stake in the existing program.

They have called the plan, which would let private companies design the space agency’s next generation of rockets, an “unacceptable” and “nonsensical” idea that leaves NASA with no long-term goal and threatens the viability of the U.S. space program.

Their statements are below.

Rep. Suzanne Kosmas
Florida 24th District

“The budget released today unfortunately confirms our fears about plans for NASA.  The President’s proposal lacks a bold vision for space exploration and begs for the type of leadership that he has described as critical for inspiring innovation for the 21st century.

“Leaving NASA with no detailed plan or timeline for exploring beyond Earth’s orbit will cede our international leadership in space, cost our country the numerous economic benefits of human spaceflight, and fail to inspire this and future generations to excel in science and technology.

“The cancellation of Orion is especially troubling and goes against the recommendations of the Augustine Commission.  The State of Florida has made significant investments to prepare KSC facilities for Orion, and the Space Coast anticipated, invested in, and planned for the commitment to be fulfilled in order to help preserve jobs.

“Though I welcome the investments in infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center, not knowing when, or even if, the next human spaceflight launches will occur makes it difficult to retain the Space Coast’s highly skilled workforce and maintain America’s international leadership in space.

“The President’s proposal is unacceptable, and I will work with my colleagues from both parties to develop a plan for space exploration that maintains a robust human spaceflight program, minimizes the gap, and protects jobs in Central Florida and throughout the country.”

Senator Richard Shelby
Alabama

U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, today issued a statement sharply criticizing the Obama Administration’s proposed NASA budget for fiscal year 2011. NASA’s budget is under the jurisdiction of the CJS Subcommittee. Constellation is NASA’s current human space flight program. A critical component of Constellation, the Ares I rocket, completed a successful test flight in October of 2009. Disregarding Constellation’s progress, the Obama Administration’s proposed fiscal year 2011 budget for NASA, released today, would cancel the program and instead fund “commercial” providers who have failed to fulfill current contracts with NASA to deliver even cargo to the International Space Station.

Despite an attempt to drastically cut funding for Constellation in the House version of the fiscal year 2010 omnibus appropriations bill, Shelby was successful in restoring $600 million to the program, funded at $3.46 billion total. Shelby was also instrumental in including language that limits NASA’s ability to terminate or alter the current Constellation program. This requires the Administration to work with Congress and wait for approval prior to changing any current human exploration plans.

“The President’s proposed NASA budget begins the death march for the future of US human space flight. The cancelation of the Constellation program and the end of human space flight does represent change – but it is certainly not the change I believe in. Congress cannot and will not sit back and watch the reckless abandonment of sound principles, a proven track record, a steady path to success, and the destruction of our human space flight program.

“Constellation is the only path forward that maintains America’s leadership in space. The successful test launch of the Ares I rocket in October represented years of work and great advancement in our Nation’s human space flight program. To discard Ares I as the foundation of space exploration without demonstrated capability or proven superiority of an alternative vehicle, is irresponsible and not cost-effective. There is no other rocket today that is as safe, or that has successfully demonstrated it can meet the country’s needs for the exploration of space.

“We cannot continue to coddle the dreams of rocket hobbyists and so-called ‘commercial’ providers who claim the future of US human space flight can be achieved faster and cheaper than Constellation. I have consistently stated the fallacy of believing the cure-all hype of these ‘commercial’ space companies, and my position has been supported time and again by both the experts and the facts. Those who believe that it is in our nation’s best interest to rely on ‘commercial’ space companies need only examine their current track record. Of the companies enlisted to deliver only cargo to space, not humans, one company failed to move beyond paper drawings, another is years behind schedule, and a replacement company for the first failure will not even be ready for test flights for years to come.

“As a resounding rebuke to the Augustine Commission Report, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, whose sole focus is on ensuring lives are not needlessly lost in our space program, stated in their 2009 report, that no commercial manufacturer ‘is currently human-rating requirements qualified, despite some claims and beliefs to the contrary.’ This is after their 2008 report, written in part by the current NASA Administrator, declared that commercial vehicles ‘are not proven to be appropriate to transport NASA personnel.’ NASA’s safety experts agree that current commercial vehicles are untested and unworthy of carrying our most valuable assets – our nation’s astronauts.

“It is unfortunate that on the anniversary of the loss of the Columbia crew this Administration is choosing to abandon our nation’s only chance at remaining the leader in human space flight. It is ironic that Constellation, a program borne out of the recommendations of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, would be eliminated in lieu of rockets repeatedly deemed unsafe for astronauts by NASA’s own Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel.

“Rocket science is not simple and it is not easy. Newcomers to this arena are continuing to learn this lesson as they struggle with repeated delays in getting their operations off the ground. It makes little sense for NASA to establish yet another social welfare program for these ‘commercial’ companies. It is simply not ‘commercial’ when the development work for your company is funded by the Government. That may be the General Motors model, but it should certainly not be considered the commercial model.

“On Friday, India announced they will be ready for their first manned space flight by 2016. With this administration’s nonsensical NASA budget request, the US will still be working on launching people on rockets that do not exist while Russia, China, and India are actually doing it. If this budget is enacted, NASA will no longer be an agency of innovation and hard science; it will be the agency of pipe dreams and fairy tales.

“I will never support a NASA budget that does not have a robust human space exploration program grounded in reality. New commercial space companies do have a chance at being successful, but that time is still too far in the future. Now is not the time to turn human space flight over to inexperience and hopeful aspirations. Instead, it is the time to cement our leadership in space with a program we know will keep America at the forefront of space exploration. Constellation as envisioned successfully delivers that objective.”

Rep Parker Griffith
Alabama 5th District

Congressman Parker Griffith speaks on the Administration’s 2011 budget proposal which would end NASA’s Constellation program.

“I’m extremely disappointed the President isn’t including any funding for the Constellation program in his 2011 budget proposal. The Administration is making a huge mistake,” said Griffith.

“We cannot interrupt this program – it is too important to the security of the United States. We depend on manned space flight – it is part of our culture, especially in our North Alabama community.

“Not granting more funding means that we are scrapping four and a half years and billions of dollars of testing. It means we are allowing other countries to get ahead of us in space exploration. If the Administration is able to carry out its plan, the U.S. will have a second-class space division. This decision is a clear sign that this Administration is out of touch with manned space flight.

“The budget that was submitted yesterday by the President is merely a proposal. I have contacted the White House and requested to meet as soon as possible about how we can bring about a solution. Congress has the ability to put this funding back into the budget and will have a final say in what is appropriated.”

Rep. John Culberson
Texas 7th District

President Obama’s FY2011 budget for NASA puts our security and prosperity at risk by virtually eliminating the U.S. human spaceflight program. The president’s budget abandons the Constellation Program – a program that enjoys broad bipartisan support – and delays U.S. access to space.

The Constellation Program is the best program to keep our country at the forefront of space exploration. It enables us to ferry crew to space safely with the Ares I rocket and funds the development of a heavy-lift cargo vehicle, which will be essential to carrying out scientific missions in space.

Earlier this year, the Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee said changes to ongoing programs – including the Constellation program – should be made only for a compelling reason.

I ask President Obama what compelling reason he has to delay U.S. access to space. I believe the president is flat wrong in his estimation that government-subsidized rocket production will speed our access to space. These cuts will not only delay our access to space for several years, they will make us dependent on Russia and China who are racing ahead with their own human spaceflight programs.

I am strongly opposed to the president’s proposal because yielding the high ground in space will make America less competitive and put our space program at risk.