One of the warmest supporters of the Obama commercial crew program has sounded the alarm that it may be about to go off the rails. Clark Lindsey, a blogger who champions commercial space, had this to say:
"Unfortunately, there are signs that NASA management may find its own way to undermine the commercial crew program. The statement from the Commercial Spaceflight Federation this week hints that there are moves within NASA to run CCDev not in the commercial services approach taken with COTS, and to a great extent by the USAF with the EELV program, but in the standard NASA top-down, sub-contractor procurement mode. This will bring in a huge array of rules and procedures that will drive costs up and up."
Lindsey goes on to speculate in the comments section of his post that entrepreneurial companies such as SpaceX may want to pull out of the commercial crew plan altogether rather than have to operate under NASA rules.
The statement that Lindsey quotes, which urges a more commercial approach to acquiring space launch services, does seem to hint that NASA may be considering a more traditional NASA/contractor regime to manage the commercial crew program. This would defeat the purpose of doing a commercial space effort, turning SpaceX and other entrepreneurial space companies into another Boeing or Lockheed Martin.
Lindsey's warning is just the latest wrinkle in the debate over the Obama approach to commercial space, which expanded the Commercial Orbital Transportation Systems program, by offering massive subsidies, starting at almost six billion dollars, but perhaps more if necessary. However, if Lindsey's scenario pans out, the old adage that those who accept government money, also has to accept government rules will once again be proven.
One of the reasons for this seems to stem from who in the Obama administration are making the decisions. In contrast to the previous Bush administration, the current regime has a conspicuous lack of people with actual business experience. President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and even NASA Administrator Mike Griffin all had run businesses and met payrolls. They knew how businesses work and how the government could either help or stifle them. Neither President Obama, Science Czar John Holdren, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, nor NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver has any experience running a private company.
Inevitable the Obama people have reverted to the mind-set that government knows best and that it can direct business rather than taking a hands-off approach and allow the commercial sector to do what it does best, provide goods and services at a good price.
One of the other problems with the Obama approach is that there seems to be a lack of encouragement to the commercial space sector to nurture private markets for human space launch services. I, in contrast to the approach taken to build the EELV family of rockets, this is by deliberate design. Obama's people fear that just as a lot of private markets did not materialize for the EELV, private markets for commercial crew, such as space tourism or servicing private space stations like the one planned by Bigelow Aerospace, will not come to fruition. Thus the government is the primary investor and the sole customer for commercial space under the Obama plan.
One possible way out of this is to pass an idea called "Zero Taxes, Zero Gravity" that creates an enterprise zone in space in which goods and services created there would not be taxed. Thus would private markets be created and the commercial space sector would not be so dependent on the government for income.
Mark R. Whittington is the author of Children of Apollo and The Last Moonwalker. He has written on space subjects for a variety of periodicals, including The Houston Chronicle, The Washington Post, USA Today, the L.A. Times, and The Weekly Standard.
