Senate Compromise is a Mixed Bag for Florida

Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy Space Center

Florida Today has an excellent editorial that neatly sums up the benefits and drawbacks of the Senate compromise bill on NASA’s budget. The editors say that on the plus side, there is relief on the employment side:

• an additional shuttle flight that would stretch out deep job cuts;
• the immediate development of a heavy-lift vehicle;
• full development of the Orion capsule.

On the other hand, the proposed budget seems to do little to advance the goal of local and state leaders to diversify the economy away from its heavily reliance upon NASA and the U.S. military.

But the bill’s catch — and one that concerns us — is that it would phase in $6 billion in funding for the commercial rocket program and other research and development projects that could be staged at KSC instead of providing it up front.

That has the potential to slow the creation of new jobs and industries — and diversification of the space industry — our region needs.

For instance, NASA could spend only $456 million on commercial rocket contracts next year with more allocated in later years, providing the companies meet safety and other requirements for flying astronauts. The safety standards are certainly needed, but critics fear other rules that involve congressional approval to buy rocket services may be used to kill the initiative, not help it mature.

Among those concerned is Frank DiBello, president of Space Florida, the state’s space-development arm.

DiBello told a Saturday meeting devoted to post-shuttle job creation the bill “kills outright the promise of real R&D opportunity for KSC. It’s not good for Florida,” the Orlando Sentinel reported.

This is a serious dilemma. To build the Orion capsule and heavy lift vehicle, the Senate bill raids the research and development and commercial crew budgets.  There doesn’t seem to be money to fund all of these priorities. So Florida can remain where it is, deeply tied to the ups and downs of NASA, and avoid a lot of pain now. Or it could take a hit and bet that the research and development and commercial crew efforts will have a bigger payoff down the road.

The commercial sector has its own ups and downs, of course. But, state and local officials seem to have decided that a more diversified economy — with a healthier mix of commercial, NASA and U.S. Air Force space activities — would be a better long-term bet for the Space Coast and Central Florida.

There is, I think, much to be admired in this approach. State and local officials see the opportunity in the program that the Obama Administration has laid out for Florida. Unfortunately, the budget is limited and either path will be painful, at first.

One positive element – which the editorial doesn’t mention – is that the Senate bill would keep NASA’s $1.9 billion program to upgrade the facilities at Cape Canaveral on track. This is badly needed to improve both NASA and Air Force operations while attracting commercials operations to the Space Coast. However, if other parts of the budget damage the commercial operations that NASA is trying to encourage, there may be fewer companies to attract.

On another point, I’m not sure that fully funding Orion is a good path to go down. There is logic to building it as an ISS rescue vehicle and, more importantly, a backup vehicle if the commercial effort fails. Creating a fully functional Orion could make the business case more difficult for companies wanting to provide that service. Coupled with the lower funding levels, Orion could kill the crew capsule aspect of commercial space, reducing it to a rocket program only.

There will be much debate and wrangling over the Senate bill. We will see how all this pans out.