Commercial Spaceflight Federation Says 'Illustrative Cut' Would
Outsource Human Spaceflight To Russia
The Commercial Spaceflight Federation released a statement
Wednesday opposing in the strongest possible terms the
"illustrative cut" to commercial spaceflight put forth by the
co-chairs of the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal
Responsibility and Reform, former Senator Alan Simpson and
University of North Carolina president Erskine Bowles.
President Obama Signs Legislation Creating Deficit
Commission
(S-R) VP Joe Biden, Erskine Bowles, President Obama, Former Senator
Alan Simpson
The commission was created by President Obama "to address the
nation's fiscal challenges." The Commission was charged with
identifying policies to improve the fiscal situation in the medium
term and to achieve fiscal sustainability over the long run.
Along with proposals for tax policy and entitlement program
reforms, the commission listed some $200 billion in "illustrative"
cuts in government spending, among them the elimination of funding
for commercial spaceflight. "The National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) plans to spend $6 billion over the next five
years to spur the development of American commercial spaceflight,"
the report reads. "This subsidy to the private sector is costly,
and while commercial spaceflight is a worthy goal, it is unclear
why the federal government should be subsidizing the training of
the potential crews of such flights. Eliminating this program would
save $1.2 billion in 2015."
The Commercial Spaceflight Federation, and others, say the
proposal shows a basic misunderstanding of the Commercial Crew
concept on the part of the commission. "This proposed cut would
have disastrous consequences for NASA and the Nation," said Bretton
Alexander, President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation.
"Commercial Crew now represents the primary means of transporting
U.S. astronauts to orbit following retirement of the Space Shuttle.
Commercial Crew will in fact result in substantial cost savings to
the U.S. taxpayer. Eliminating Commercial Crew would result
in total reliance on Russia to get to the Space Station and result
in the loss of thousands of high-tech jobs here in the United
States."
"The bottom line is that elimination of NASA's Commercial Crew
program will cede human spaceflight to Russia," he continued.
"Commercial Crew is the fastest way to reduce the gap following
Shuttle retirement, minimizing the time we are dependent on buying
seats from the Russians. Some commercial providers have publicly
committed to significant cost savings on a per-seat basis as
compared to the Russian alternative.
Bretton Alexander
"Moreover, the Deficit Commission also appears to misunderstand
the very nature of the Commercial Crew Program. Rather than being
'a subsidy to the private sector,' the Commercial Crew program is
fulfilling an essential national need by developing the next U.S.
spacecraft to take astronauts to the Space Station, while
stimulating markets beyond government as well. It is, in fact, a
win-win for the American taxpayer.
"Last year, an independent blue-ribbon commission headed by Norm
Augustine recommended to President Obama that NASA partner with the
private sector on the development of its next manned spacecraft.
Since then, groups including 25 former NASA astronauts and 14 Nobel
laureates have all endorsed the Commercial Crew Program. The
deficit commission couldn't have gotten this more wrong - this is a
program NASA cannot afford to do without," Alexander concluded.