The Joe Biden Admin Space Exploration Policy

[Roger E. Moore]

Not much can be said with certainty about this at the moment, but here is a good starting place for discussion.

https://spacenews.com/from-the-moon-...-reshape-nasa/

QUOTES: "One of the things that I found surprising is that the Biden campaign did not issue a space policy statement,” said John Logsdon, founder and former director of George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute. “So, we’re left with the Democratic Party platform said.”

That platform included one paragraph about space which Logsdon considered “very positive,” if not without much detail. The platform endorsed, in broad terms, much of what NASA was currently doing, from science and technology development to continued operation of the International Space Station and human space exploration.

Most in the space industry who read that passage took away two major changes a Biden administration would pursue. The platform mentions “strengthening” Earth observation programs at both NASA and NOAA “to better understand how climate change is impacting our home planet.” That fits into a broader interest in climate change, which is one of four priorities identified by the incoming Biden administration alongside COVID-19, economic recovery and racial equity.

“Managing the Earth’s ability to sustain human life and biodiversity will likely, in my view, dominate a civil space agenda for a Biden-Harris administration,” predicted Lori Garver, a former NASA deputy administrator during the Obama administration, during a Nov. 7 speech at the SpaceVision 2020 conference by Students for the Exploration and Development of Space....

The other change is in human space exploration. While the platform stated the party supported “NASA’s work to return Americans to the moon and go beyond to Mars,” it made no mention of a date for doing so, in particular the 2024 date set by the Trump administration last year. That’s led to speculation that the Biden administration will, at the very least, slow down the Artemis program, perhaps freeing up money for Earth science and other priorities elsewhere in the agency.

“I don’t think Artemis will get canceled. I also don’t think it will get any more money than what it’s currently getting,” said Wendy Whitman Cobb, a professor at the U.S. Air Force School of Advanced Air and Space Studies whose research includes space policy.

[Roger E. Moore]

Another view: Artemis delayed, US Space Force left alone, climate focus.

https://www.space.com/space-force-to...eans-for-space

[schlaugh]

First stop in that policy (and maybe a guidepost for future policy planning) will be to name a replacement for Jim Bridenstine, assuming he actually does leave his post as head of NASA.

[Roger E. Moore]

Time magazine: Less sanguine about the USSF's chances for survival, but I personally think the USSF will be kept.

https://time.com/5907796/biden-space-program/

[Roger E. Moore]

USSF likely to remain.

https://spacenews.com/biden-likely-t...e-investments/

[Roger E. Moore]

First stop in that policy (and maybe a guidepost for future policy planning) will be to name a replacement for Jim Bridenstine, assuming he actually does leave his post as head of NASA.

Kendra Horn is a possible replacement.

https://spacenews.com/horn-eyes-spac...dministration/

[Swift]

<snip>
QUOTES: "One of the things that I found surprising is that the Biden campaign did not issue a space policy statement,” said John Logsdon, founder and former director of George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute. “So, we’re left with the Democratic Party platform said.”

Maybe its just me, but I find that completely unsurprising. Space policy was not an issue in the campaign.

[KaiYeves]

An article in the latest issue of The Space Review about President-elect Biden and the Moon Treaty.

[bknight]

Kendra Horn is a possible replacement.

https://spacenews.com/horn-eyes-spac...dministration/

Lose one government job move onto the next.

[schlaugh]

Biden has chosen a transition team specific to NASA.

President-elect Biden names 8-person NASA transition team
President-elect Joe Biden has announced the team that will bring him up to speed on all things NASA ahead of his January 2021 inauguration.

The NASA "agency review team" consists of five women and three men, and it includes two former NASA chief scientists and a former astronaut among its diverse ranks. All are serving on a volunteer basis, according to the review team website, which you can find here.

That website also states the purpose of the various teams: "Agency review teams are responsible for understanding the operations of each agency, ensuring a smooth transfer of power, and preparing for President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris and their cabinet to hit the ground running on Day One."

[Garrison]

Biden has chosen a transition team specific to NASA.

Which makes sense. Given Biden was VP under Obama I wouldn't be surprised to see him skewing towards commercial providers when it come to manned spaceflight.

[schlaugh]

Kendra Horn is a possible replacement.

https://spacenews.com/horn-eyes-spac...dministration/

Horn is sponsor of a bill that emerged from her committee in January (but hasn't made it to the floor) that would place the Lunar Gateway back into Mars missions. But I thought that Gateway had been taken out of those plans? That bill also pushes for a NASA-owned lander, rather than buying landing services from companies such as SpaceX.

The bill, designated H.R. 5666 and introduced by Rep. Kendra Horn (D-Okla.), chair of the committee’s space subcommittee, seeks to put a human return to the moon within the context of a larger “Moon to Mars” program that would no longer have the goal of returning humans to the surface of the moon by 2024, as Vice President Pence announced in March 2019.

“The Moon to Mars program shall have the interim goal of sending a crewed mission to the lunar surface by 2028 and a goal of sending a crewed mission to orbit Mars by 2033,” the bill states.

NASA’s current plans for returning to the moon call for the development of a lunar Gateway in orbit around the moon, which would serve as a staging area for expeditions to the lunar surface. The bill would instead call this facility the “Gateway to Mars,” and allow it to be based elsewhere in cislunar space. The Gateway would also not be required to support lunar landings.

<snip>

While the bill would direct NASA to perform at least two crewed lunar landings a year, the bill makes clear the agency’s activities at the moon would primarily be those required to support a later human mission to Mars. The bill directs NASA to identify “the minimum set of human and robotic lunar surface activities that must be completed to enable a human mission to Mars” and how NASA will complete those activities within five years of the first crewed landing under the program.

[Robert Hags]

I am sure that today most likely the United States will not be able to continue the latest projects due to low stability within the country. Probably half a year or a year will pass when the head of NASA will gain a foothold in his post and cooperate with the new administration (since Jim Brandenstein has expressed a desire to leave).
But I must say that on the other hand, the United States must continue to implement its programs and I think that one way or another, under any circumstances, the expansion into space will not stop because the other countries that are also developing the space industry now stepping on USA's heels.

[Garrison]

I am sure that today most likely the United States will not be able to continue the latest projects due to low stability within the country. Probably half a year or a year will pass when the head of NASA will gain a foothold in his post and cooperate with the new administration (since Jim Brandenstein has expressed a desire to leave).
But I must say that on the other hand, the United States must continue to implement its programs and I think that one way or another, under any circumstances, the expansion into space will not stop because the other countries that are also developing the space industry now stepping on USA's heels.

Okay not an American, but the idea that other nations are 'stepping on USA's heels' is an overstatement. The Russian program is in a long term decline, India is a long way off from launching any manned vehicles and while the Chang'e 5 mission is impressive their proposed moon rocket the Long March 9 isn't planned to fly until around 2030. Right now the USA has the only true Heavy launch vehicle in the shape of the Falcon Heavy and the only others likely to become operational in the next 5 years are also USA based and the most advanced of those, the Starship/Superheavy is not a government program. The reality that the Biden administration may have to face is that they can no longer set the parameters for what the USA does in space.

[Jens]

Okay not an American, but the idea that other nations are 'stepping on USA's heels' is an overstatement.

Actually, I am an American, and I also found that phrase odd. Actually I'm not really sure what it means. I know of two idioms, "stepping on his toes" and "on his heels," and I'm not sure which this would refer to (I assume the second). As a person who works in the scientific research field, I think that most scientists are actually happy that other countries are also developing rockets and stuff because it gives them more opportunities to do experiments which might provide us with useful knowledge.

[Roger E. Moore]

"Biden's administration is likely to push the date for a lunar landing back several years – a goal that aligns with the House Science Committee's proposed bill that would aim to land astronauts on the moon by 2028."

https://www.businessinsider.com/bide...ration-2020-11

[Roger E. Moore]

Secure World Foundation reports gives recommendations for Biden administration: less emphasis on warfighting, more emphasis on climate change monitoring and procurement of materials and resources for space program. Nothing shocking, a moderate policy course seems to be the message.

https://spacenews.com/space-policy-a...-acquisitions/

The 42-page report from the Secure World Foundation released Dec. 2 "delves into a number of space policy issues and lists recommendations for the Biden-Harris administration. “We don’t expect space to be the biggest Biden priority,” says Krystal Azelton, the foundation’s director of space applications programs. Ensuring space sustainability should be a concern, however, she says. “It’s important to get it right because space is essential to modern life.” "

Link to full report is here:

https://swfound.org/media/207084/swf...g_2020_web.pdf It recommends keeping the US Space Force.

[Garrison]

"Biden's administration is likely to push the date for a lunar landing back several years – a goal that aligns with the House Science Committee's proposed bill that would aim to land astronauts on the moon by 2028."

https://www.businessinsider.com/bide...ration-2020-11

as the recent issues with the Orion capsule have reinforced 2024 was never anything more than a pipe dream without ludicrous sums of of money. I think they could beat 2028, if they weren't so attached to the SLS.

[Roger E. Moore]

Encouraging news, as Biden helped bring about the Commercial Crew deal between NASA and SpaceX. So good things might be in the offing.

https://futurism.com/joe-biden-nasa-spacex-launch

[bknight]

Encouraging news, as Biden helped bring about the Commercial Crew deal between NASA and SpaceX. So good things might be in the offing.

https://futurism.com/joe-biden-nasa-spacex-launch

News(?) as this might be history not news. Dates back to 2010.

[Roger E. Moore]

News(?) as this might be history not news. Dates back to 2010.

Yes. Biden has a history of supporting the space program and encouraging commercial space industries. It bodes well.

[Roger E. Moore]

Op-ed | Building Back Better: Critical first issues for a successful Biden space policy.

QUOTE: We urge the Biden administration to place a high priority on supporting U.S. space activities by building on recent national space policy decisions that reflect long-standing U.S. principles... Consistency across key national space efforts, such as retaining the National Space Council and building out the commercial space sector, the Space Force, and the Artemis Program and Accords, will help move the United States forward and demonstrate stability to international partners...

https://spacenews.com/op-ed-building...-space-policy/

[selvaarchi]

"BIDEN TEAM ENGAGING WITH NASA, INDUSTRY"

https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/b...nasa-industry/

President-elect Joe Biden’s Agency Review Team for NASA is hard at work engaging with the agency and the space industry according to two people involved in those activities. Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris officially won the Electoral College vote today 306-232 and will take office on January 20, 2021.

Kathy Lueders, head of NASA’s human spaceflight program, said today that the Agency Review Team is “engaged” and “we’re moving on discussions and working through plans.”

Chuck Beames, Executive Chairman and Chief Strategy Office of York Space Systems, said he also has been talking with them and “it appears that there will be lots of opportunities for more of the sort of commercial type of activities and earth sciences stuff in NASA and also commercial remote sensing just generally. They’re looking for opportunities and we’re looking to help with that.”

[publiusr]

I was hoping for an SPSS push.

[selvaarchi]

"Biden space advisers urge cooperation with China"

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/1...a-space-448529

Top advisers to Joe Biden have argued that it's important to cooperate with China on space exploration, even as the incoming administration treats Beijing as its top economic and military competitor in virtually every other realm.

They assert that despite China's pattern of stealing American technology and diverting it for military purposes, a limited space partnership between Washington and Beijing could reduce tensions and the likelihood of a destabilizing space race. The move would be akin to the cooperation between the U.S. and Russia's civilian space programs during the height of the Cold War.

[docmordrid]

"Biden space advisers urge cooperation with China"

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/1...a-space-448529

"They assert that despite China's pattern of stealing American technology and diverting it for military purposes, a limited space partnership between Washington and Beijing could reduce tensions and the likelihood of a destabilizing space race."

Too late; China's already making aggressive moves in space, and the Biden administration would need to repeal the 2011 (Obama administration) Wolf Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

US Public Law 112–10, Sec. 1340,

(a) None of the funds made available by this division may be used for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or the Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement, or execute a bilateral policy, program, order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company unless such activities are specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of enactment of this division. (b) The limitation in subsection (a) shall also apply to any funds used to effectuate the hosting of official Chinese visitors at facilities belonging to or utilized by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

[selvaarchi]

Too late; China's already making aggressive moves in space, and the Biden administration would need to repeal the 2011 (Obama administration) Wolf Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

US Public Law 112–10, Sec. 1340,

Why too late? If it going to be changed than this is where changes could take place.

[Noclevername]

Why too late? If it going to be changed than this is where changes could take place.

Is it going to be changed?

[Jens]

Too late; China's already making aggressive moves in space, and the Biden administration would need to repeal the 2011 (Obama administration) Wolf Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

A bit of a nitpick, but from the text you quoted it seems that it doesn't have to be repealed, as it leaves open activities that are "specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of enactment of this division." So a program could be authorized by a separate law without repealing the amendment, I suppose.

[Jens]

Is it going to be changed?

I think they added "if," which makes it a hypothetical. I don't think anybody (not even Biden himself) would know if it can be changed at this point.