President Can’t Cut Constellation Without Congressional Approval

by Nancy Atkinson on January 28, 2010

With all the speculation currently making the rounds about Obama axing the Constellation program and ending the possibilities of humans returning to the Moon anytime soon, it was brought to our attention by a reader that under the 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R. 3288, passed on September 17, 2009, Congress inserted a clause in the language of the FY2010 NASA funding bill that would prevent President Obama from terminating the Constellation program without Congressional approval. Senator Bill Nelson of Florida and Senator Richard Shelby from Alabama — two states that have a huge stake in NASA’s future — were the main sponsors of the clause in the Senate version. So, it doesn’t appear that Obama can just cut Constellation, not without a fight, anyway.

Also while we’re on the subject of NASA’s future, Administrator Charlie Bolden spoke in Israel yesterday, and journalist Avi Blizovsky from the online publication Hayadan shared with Universe Today some interesting comments Bolden made about NASA’s direction.

Bolden apparently confirmed that an agreement had been reached between NASA and its international partners to continue operations of the International Space Station until 2020. (Another Russian report said that NASA has suggested keeping the station operational until 2028).

Charlie Bolden in Israel. Credit: Avi Blizovsky

Bolden was in Israel at the Ilan Ramon International Space Conference to help announce that two new Israeli astronauts will be named.

Bolden said there will be dramatic changes to the human spaceflight program. “We are going to have to adapt to change, and the President’s decision is the beginning of the debate,” Bolden said. Without offering specific detail he added, “Based on what I know today is this is the best thing for the nation and for the family of space fairing nations.”

He said the current budgetary situation does not allow NASA to go to the Moon, but he emphasized the importance of international partnerships returning to the Moon and going to Mars. “Flying in space is expensive and risky and requires a broad set of capabilities that it is difficult for one nation to do it,” he said. “I think what President Obama wants me to do is work more closely with international partners.”

But he also stressed how commercial space companies will extremely important to the future of space exploration.

“As we phase the space shuttle out, we have got to find another way to get humans to space. What we’re going to focus on, … is facilitating the success of, I like to use the term ‘entrepreneurial interests’,” he said, saying that NASA has always used commercial companies to build and maintain the shuttle and other vehicles. “What’s going to change, I think, is that instead of NASA buying a vehicle and then taking over its primary operations, we will buy a service.”

So, back to speculating:

Also, remember the news that broke shortly after Obama and Bolden met at the White House in December: a White House insider reported that Obama is going cut Ares, but still ask Congress to fund a new heavy-lift launcher to take humans to the moon, asteroids, and the moons of Mars. The news in December said NASA would receive an additional $1 billion in 2011 (now reports are saying $1.8 billion) to get the new launcher on track and to bolster the agency’s fleet of robotic Earth-monitoring spacecraft.

So don’t count out returning to the Moon just yet.

Hat tip to UT reader Craigboy and the Daily Kos

Tagged as: Constellation program, NASA

← Older Comments
  • Hon. Salacious B. Crumb

    rudeyd said;

    I agree, we need to take care of our people first. BUT – I think we should step back from helping the entire world as soon IF it interferes with our progress and goals as a nation.

    Compassion for one’s fellow man never looked so awful.

    “Our way or the highway” is such a great foreign policy, eh?

    Clearly Imperialism is also not one of the goals of the American Republic. To quote your John Quincy Adams in 1921 who said of America in his famous speech “Warning Against the Search for “Monsters to Destroy,”;

    Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force…. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit….

    Helping others should be a virtue and NOT a condition. Surely the very core tenet of the ugly American.

    I stand by my earlier statement;

    The whole exploration of space should be an international effort whose contributions are no exclusive to America (nor doing it “on behalf of humankind”) but a worldwide endeavour for the benefit of everyone.

  • http://www.crossfirefusion.com/nuclear-fusion-reactor/overview.html Johnson

    I think NASA should invest more in aneutronic propulsion. Aneutronic reactor concept potentially applicable to space propulsion exist, hence returning to the Moon and going to Mars can be more affordable.

  • Mr. Man

    I think as a country we should do everything we can to help advance the cause of space.

    “I say. Get the whole US economy back on track, then worry about all the “exploration stuff.”
    -Hon. Salacious B. Crumb

    Crumb, you suffer from a lack of imagination: renewed interest in space will help CREATE JOBS, in addition to this it will open up whole new oppurtunities in all kinds of fields, meaning lots of room for innovation and commerce. If we begin taking on this defeatist attitude we might as well shelve the whole thing forever, because there will always be unemployment, there will always be poverty. These things have gone on for millennia but they’ve never stopped us from exploring or taking risks before. Why should they now?
    As for the whole “global endeavor” idea, it would be better if the USA went at it alone, or with a few close partners. That way other large nations (Russia, China) will have the meaningful competition needed to push themselves into space, in productive ‘cold-war era’ space races. Get private sector involved and soon there will be a flourishing competitive space enviroment needed to spur on true progress.

    Mr. Man

  • Hon. Salacious B. Crumb

    Mr. Man

    Boy, could you take anything more out of context.

    The central problem of the US economy is that your government is already up to its eyeballs in debt. The current federal debt is $3.4 trillion (37,000 billion) 12.3% of GDP!, yet the revenue from taxes is merely $1.06 trillion.

    Making up the interest let alone reducing the US federal debt is another. Only two ways seems feasible – increase taxes or reduce federal spend on projects.

    For NASA, the continuance of the workforce and maintaining job is unlikely to be slashed (actually increase). However, NEW programmes (like going to the Moon) must be on hold to the economy recovers sufficiently.

    Americans have few choices but to have their taxes raised, or other programmes slash, replanted into the new moon missions.

    I’m a realist, and don’t suffer from any “lack of imagination.”

    If you don’t have surplus money to throw around, and your people are hurting or have trouble ‘paying the bills’, austerity for the short-term is the only option. The average Joe in the street now has to do it, why not the economy?

    Sorry. Your seemingly rousing words actually ring very hollow – following the usual puppet master’s empty rhetoric. Obama at least hears the clarion calls of potential economic disaster. Perhaps he and Congress might be smart enough to listen and getting the economy back on the rails. If they don’t, things will be getting worst not better.

    So what if the US returns to the Moon in 2030 or 2040. It will still be there, and not owned by anyone. Dream, on little buddy!

  • Aodhhan

    You’re right…

    American is way over its head in debt. America needs to quit feeding and sponsoring the entire world. We pay more than our fair share to the United Nations, and I’m tired of our troops doing peace keeping missions, when it isn’t trained to do this.

    Our people are too willing to give to others when they are in need, and not willing to do enough for their own. People can dial a number on their phone and raise 50 million in one weekend for Haiti, yet raise their nose to families in shelters. Is this wrong…? Not necessarily.

    Perhaps we should do what we did after World War I. Sit back, and take care of only our own. No longer allow foreigners to attend our universities, and allow another dictator like Hitler take over the rest of the world. Will Australians step up and take care of the rest of the world, and allow their debt to increase? No way… they have problems putting out fires at home; let alone deal with the problems of others. Canada probably could, however they don’t have or never will have the tax base.

    The problem with Obama’s economic policies, is that they are short term fixes to long term problems. Not only are they short term, but they are far too expensive. You don’t buy Gucci when a paper sack will do the job.

    Cutting back a NASA program which will not only create new technology, but will also employthousands of workers is obviously short-sighted. Out sourcing jobs to other countries when his own country is at 10% unemployment is increasingly short-sided. His administration is now being investigated for awarding a contract (to a political contributor) without a bidding process and paying too much. Especially troublesome, when this is another campaign promise he has broken.

    It is easy to bash the United States; because they are everywhere and have to be in everything. Yet, if your country will step up and start paying for the majority of the bill… we will happily allow your debt to pile up and allow us to take a break.

    Heck… I would be happy if your country would even match our funds given to the UN every year.

  • Hon. Salacious B. Crumb

    @ Aodhhan

    “Will Australians step up and take care of the rest of the world, and allow their debt to increase? No way… they have problems putting out fires at home; let alone deal with the problems of others.”

    Not quite true. The tsunami of December 2004 was (and is) well supported by Australians, and aid is also in the regions. The US was supported in both Iraq and still Afghanistan. However, we have about 8% of the population (and about 8% tax base.) Making us out as out and out selfish bastards is a bit of a long bow,

    As to; “It is easy to bash the United States…” I’ve done no such thing, and it is usual argument when others disagree with you. The priorities of any nation is towards its economy and its people, so the egalitarian principles throughout it of its society can achieve. As the world economy is hitched on the American economy, it is important that its own strength is maintained. A lower and damaged American economy hits others beyond its shores, hitting other in the hip pocket too.

    Saying “we will happily allow your debt to pile up and allow us to take a break.” is poor economics at best and rather irresponsible.

    No one has questioning here the contributions the US is or has been making. What is questionable is the economic policies and the disregard (blindness, actually) with its long term goals.
    Going back to the moon is a wonderful and laudable goal, but IMO, you should be especially looking at the health care and its growing infant mortality. (probably fixed in a short time if the populous has the will to do so.) Get the economy is order must be the priority.

    As I’ve say; “So what if the US returns to the Moon in 2030 or 2040. It will still be there, and not owned by anyone.” It now seems Obama already agrees.

← Older Comments

Previous post:

Next post: