Out-of-this-World Pork in the Beehive State
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) seems to have no qualms about either strong-arming federal agencies to supply pork to his state, or to vociferously take pride in such actions.
In a meeting at NASA headquarters a week and a half ago with other members of the Utah delegation (including his junior colleague, the departing, ousted-by-tea-partiers Senator Bob Bennett), he reportedly bullied NASA Administrator Charles Bolden and his deputy, Lori Garver, to ensure that any new rockets the space agency designed are built to congressional specifications.
At the beginning of October, following passage of the new NASA re-authorization bill, the senator gloated about his success in inserting language in it that he hoped would guarantee continuing contracts for ATK, the northern-Utah manufacturer of the Shuttle-style solid rocket boosters.
“Though we will have hurdles to face in the future, the House passage of the Senate bill builds a foundation for the future of the civilian solid rocket motor industry in Utah,” Hatch said. “This was a collaborative effort, and I’m grateful to members of the Utah congressional delegation for their hard work and support on this legislation.”
Hatch was successful in getting language inserted in the bill which details specific payload requirements for a heavy-lift space launch system that, Utah industry experts agree, can only be realistically met through the use of solid rocket motors like the ones manufactured by ATK in northern Utah. The legislation further requires NASA to use, to the extent practicable, existing contracts, workforces and industries from the Space Shuttle and Ares rockets, including solid rocket motors. The bill also requires an operational capability for the space launch system by the end of 2016. This deadline makes it very difficult for the development of an alternative system which does not use solid rocket motors.
Emphases mine. One wonders what industry experts from other states might think. I have my opinion, and I don’t agree. As for the words “to the extent practicable,” more to come, below.
Thursday’s meeting seems to have resulted from the recent award of a dozen contracts (including one to ATK) to provide data for trade studies that NASA plans to perform to determine the best design for the new heavy-lift launch system that Congress insists that NASA build, despite the fact that there is neither a mission planned for it, nor payloads designed for it, nor money with which to develop and build them. Hatch and the other rocket scientists on the Hill seem to be concerned by NASA’s language in its announcement of the rewards that the studies
…will include heritage systems from shuttle and Ares, as well as alternative architectures and identify propulsion technology gaps including main propulsion elements, propellant tanks and rocket health management systems.
“Aternative architectures” probably raised a red flag with them, implying that the final study product might not be Shuttle derived.
In defending their home-grown pork, the delegation issued statements that were … well, let’s just say uninformed, so as not to impugn their honesty.
The idea of alternatives to shuttle- and Ares-derived concepts, both of which used solid rocket motors, is anathema to the Utah senators and congressmen. “I join my colleagues in admonishing NASA to strictly adhere to the law and use solid rocket motors in the development of the new Space Launch System,” Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) said in the statement. “Today’s meeting confirms that we are in a long-term fight over the future of NASA’s manned space flight program,” added Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT). “I remain very concerned that NASA continues to delay the transition from Constellation systems toward the new heavy-lift program while they needlessly explore private start-up technologies that remain unproven, require more money and are unfit for human-rated space travel.”
Instructive, but heart-breaking, is all one can say upon reading this. The euphemistic “heritage systems” alone is insult enough. These bastards; we aim at the stars and Washington can’t get a rocket past Salt Lake City.
Down the Hatch!
“But expect Orrin Hatch, Rob Bishop, Jason Chaffetz, and other Utah representatives to continue to betray fiscal-conservative principles (and our prospects for affordable spaceflight) in favor of state and district jobs. At least, that is, until the Utah Tea Party decides that they will have to make more examples in the 2012 primaries.”
The Democrats and the Republicans in Congress still don’t seem to get it. They think that this past election was nothing more than a “childish outburst” from the Tea Party members. Well, think again. What we accomplished in 2010 can certainly happen again in 2012. Bank on it. If these people still don’t get it, then in 2012 they’ll be looking for new day jobs. The Federal government needs to be reduced and spending needs to be cut by A LOT. And by A LOT we don’t mean “don’t cut it in my state but cut it everywhere else.” The only people who still want to spend money as if there is no such thing as a deficit are the Democrats. These RINO Republicans can join them if they really feel the need to spend more money. But it doesn’t mean we will ever vote for them again.
Hatch will never leave, he will have to die in office.
Chavez and Bishop are very well liked.
These guys, tea party or not, will not be leaving. They would have to make a very very major faux pas.
Bennett was another story…ie his vote on earmarks , these type things were his down fall in his state. It’s unfortunate he ended us so disliked by voters. However, there were several reasons he could not overcome.
Orrin Hatch is on thin ice right now and the “tea party” groups really do have a big target painted on the back of Hatch at the moment. The disgust and anger that Bob Bennett had is only going to be much, much worse for Hatch, and note that he is up for election in 2012. Yes, the “country club” Republicans love Hatch and think he is the greatest thing around, but the political landscape has changed and it certainly isn’t going to be a cake walk for Hatch.
The only thing Hatch has going for him is that he knows he is in trouble, and that there is blood in the water from having Bob Bennett taken out. There are also some strong potential candidates in Utah that could step up and take the place of Hatch too.
The other members of the “Utah delegation” not mentioned in this article are Jim Matheson (D-2nd district) and Mike Lee, the Senator-elect who is taking Bob Bennett’s seat. Interestingly, Mike Lee is one who supported and got a “no earmark” rule put through the Senate Republican Caucus as one of the ground rules for the next congress. I suppose Orrin Hatch has to put that pork in now before he is going to be stopped by members of his own party. Surprisingly, Jim Matheson is not really a strong supporter of Barack Obama and has endorsed Hatch’s position on the ATK funding as well in other statements, although I don’t know what his position is on these particular matters right now.
What Rand Simberg didn’t mention here, however, is that much of the resistance to abandoning the ATK facilities is in part because Rob Bishop (incoming chair of the House Armed Services Committee…. just a tiny little position of little importance in DC) wants to see the infrastructure maintained for solid rocket construction and development for the day when the ICBM inventory of America needs to be replaced. This is a laudable goal after a fashion, but it seems sort of odd that NASA has to be the one to pay for this infrastructure and not the U.S. Air Force, if it is needed at all. The goal here is to provide a customer for the solid rocket fuels and in particular Ammonium Perchlorate. There are very few potential customers for this compound, and the Shuttle program has at least been able to sustain a steady consumption of this compound. No, I don’t think it is NASA’s responsibility to wast several billion dollars and cut out the robotic science missions so that American can perhaps have some new ICBMs in a decade or two at a slightly cheaper price, but that is much of the logic being followed here.
sounds good…but, target or no target, not even the tea party can get them out. We can debate this til the cows come home. The guys I mentioned are not going anywhere. They have the ‘right” support…=]
Congress has no business passing laws requiring specific technologies. Let the different technologies stand or fall on their own merit. Once again, the old guard GOP mobsters show they are no better than the socialists. . . fire the bums!
Fortunately, as noted above, the law does not require NASA to continue to derive the new vehicle from Shuttle bits. It must only do so if (as noted above) “practicable,” and any sensible study result will show that it is not, relative to more modern and affordable approaches.
There is more than one way to define the word “practicable.” You and I see it from the technical perspective and realize that using Shuttle technology is not required and will greatly drive up the costs of the Heavy Lift Vehicle to Nowhere (HLVN). Hatch and the like are thinking of what is “politically practicable” which is a completely different issue. They want jobs in their districts and that’s the most important criteria. Little else matters, so if that criteria isn’t met, they’ll withhold their support. They’ll borrow and spend billions of dollars to build the HLVN and billions more in support infrastructure and personnel so long as sufficient amounts of the money gets spent in their districts. Damn them all to Hell.
Politics (pronouced poly ticks) – “poly” means many and “ticks” are blood-sucking parasites. Hatch, Shelby and the rest fit that definition perfectly.
Since when is Congress made up of rocket scientists? Congressional standards? If their rocket standards are anything like their ethical standards they couldn’t launch a coke and mentos rocket.
And this is more evidence that Hatch needs to go.
There is a similar situation here in Colorado where bedrock conservative Republican; and Tea Party favorites; congressmen Mike Coffman and Doug Lamborn fall all over themselves promoting aerospace jobs. What they don’t share is that much of the spending on aerospace comes from the willingness of Chinese and other Asian bankers to keep buying U.S. debt.
Now, the list of advances in medicine, materials construction, and other industries resulting from the space program is almost endless. But in a time of high deficits, there have to be some limits. Same in terms of spending with defense contractors for more and more weapons systems; and the same contractors are involved in both defense and NASA.
Early this year, Congress spent about $1.5 billion for five more C-17 transport planes that the Air Force neither wanted nor needed. The conservative Republican congressman from Georgia; can’t recall his name; said the spending was needed to save jobs. Well, he opposed the GM & Chrysler bailouts which also saved jobs. An example of what Larry J. says (#4) in wanting jobs in his district, but who cares about Michigan?
It’s not a matter of defeating so-called “RINOs” in elections; it’s more a matter of getting rid of “CINOs” (conservatives in name only). But, what might you get if/when Hatch is replaced? The guy who is replacing Bennett isn’t the brightest bulb in the chandelier, so to speak.
A few facts that aren’t mentioned in the article. Mr. Simberg is a strong supporter of the Obama administration’s redirection of NASA that effectively will kill US manned spaceflight for a generation.
The pork that the Utah politicians are trying to protect is jobs in the strategically vital solid propulsion industry. Here are a few facts about that industry:
The technology to design and build large solid rocket boosters for space launch is the same as for strategic missiles. There has been no appreciable new design work in this area for over 25 years. This US industry once boasted five companies employing about 35,000 people. Today there are only two companies left employing about 4,000. Without new design work, employment will drop to about 3,000. the average age of the employees is approaching 50. Critical engineering expertise, nearly impossible to replace (which the US spent 50 years and hundreds of billions to develop), is being lost on a weekly basis.
By the way, I work for a competitor to ATK and we are benefiting from their lack of work.
6. I’ll say the same thing as I said about Obama being impeached and replaced with Biden- I’ll take stupid over malicious any day of the week.
A few facts that aren’t mentioned in the article. Mr. Simberg is a strong supporter of the Obama administration’s redirection of NASA that effectively will kill US manned spaceflight for a generation.
This is inaccurate. It would kill NASA’s monopoly on US manned spaceflight by giving the job of carrying astronauts to and from low Earth orbit (LEO) to commercial companies. NASA’s Constellation program (AKA Apollo on Steroids) was costing approximately $50 billion to develop the Ares I booster and the Orion capsule. That would buy the capability to send 4 people into LEO and nothing more. Given the high R&D costs and the use of expensive Shuttle hardware, it’s likely the cost per mission for an Ares I and Orion would be over a billion dollars – as expensive as a Shuttle launch with far less capability. To go beyond LEO, they proposed spending many more billions to develop the heavy lift Ares V and billions more to develop the upper stage and lunar lander. That’s money we simply don’t have.
By way of contrast, SpaceX has spend somewhat less than $600 million to develop the lightweight Falcon 1 and medium lifter Falcon 9 boosters including all of the engines, avionics, and support infrastructure. Oh, that price also includes their Dragon capsule. If all goes well, a Falcon 9 will carry the first test Dragon capsule into orbit as soon as next week. In the current form, Dragon is unmanned but they designed it to carry up to 7 people to LEO. That’s 7 people (vice 4 for Orion) to LEO for less than $200 million (vice >$1 billion for Ares I/Orion).
The technology to design and build large solid rocket boosters for space launch is the same as for strategic missiles. There has been no appreciable new design work in this area for over 25 years. This US industry once boasted five companies employing about 35,000 people. Today there are only two companies left employing about 4,000. Without new design work, employment will drop to about 3,000. the average age of the employees is approaching 50. Critical engineering expertise, nearly impossible to replace (which the US spent 50 years and hundreds of billions to develop), is being lost on a weekly basis.
I commend you for your honesty. At least you’re admitting this is nothing more than a government make-work project. If the military needs to maintain the industrial base for large solid rocket motors, then it should come from the defense budget, not NASA’s. Since the retirement of the Titan IV and with no projected ICBM larger than the Minuteman III on the horizon for the next 20 years or so, perhaps this is a technology we can allow to die.
If you think NASA operates as an isolated stand-alone entity…you are dead wrong! They operate with cohorts of many scientific disciplines throughout [private and government] organizations from virtually around the globe.
Theres NO monopoly involved! Right or wrong, there simply has not been the funding to support advanced interest and growth into the NASA projects. The greatest advances made by NASA has been benefited by private sector economies with a vast multitude of consumer technonolgies and products.
I agree that NASA should transition to the private sector but, I for one am proud of this one [government] run program that actually benefited society and the private sector economies for a very long time now. Though I don’t have the numbers, I believe that the economic return has been far greater than the investment.
I don’t see any quotes from Jason Chaffetz in this article, just the standard attribution “Utah Delegation”. Did you ask Rep.Chaffetz about his position? If he was in support of it then I will be extremely disappointed. However, I intend to contact him and get the scoop straight from him. If he says yes, then I’ll let him know he doesn’t have my support any more. I’ll report back on what he says. As for Hatch…He’s going the way of Bennett..HE IS DONE!
You will find NOBODY more crtical of the GOP and government in general than myself BUT…..
This kind of “journalist” writing is pathetic on all levels!
First, there is NO “pork $$$$” involved! There is NO binding language involved! There is NO langauage that retards competition! There is NO language that stymies development of alternatives to solid fuel power systems!
While I have no great appreciation for the overall congressional work of Senator Hatch, this is one occaision for which he seems to be doing the work on behalf of the State and the people of Utah that elected him to represent them….in a completely ethical means.
Government specifications for goods and services is mandated to the departments and agencies, under policies and procedure contained in contract law. NASA is driven by the sciences first and foremost. Now, IF, congress and Senator Hatch were to be corrupting the contractural processes of letting standing bids or writing binding language micro managing on behalf of non competiveness to such processes by NASA, that may be a story of substance.
This is purely a non story in the context written!
Congress has written level 1 requirements into legislation for NASA’s next man launching platform, unconnected to the supposed level 0 requirement that it be able to take astronauts to space. Congress shouldn’t be writing/adopting anything other than level 0 requirements, i.e. the mission. The requirement that it be an HLV is already pre-selecting engineering solutions for the mission, which Congress has no legitimate authority to do – that is an executive function. NASA should be making that decision, preferrably after a thorough analysis of alternatives (which Rand mentioned early in the article as the reason why the Utah delegation got their panties in a twist).
Your argument that there is ‘NO’ pork etc. involved in this legislation doesn’t follow, unless you accept Rand’s definition of “practicable” which would effectively wipe out all the level 1 congress dictated requirements. Obviously the Utah delegation does not accept his definition as they are currently trying to pressure NASA to follow their legislative demands, so your argument is fallacious.
Tut tut T.T. Thomas – such vehemence – who do you work for?
And many of these politicians are not fit for human-rated governance – lining their own pockets and those of their friends is their only skill.
Guys – the web is going to end that sorry chapter (volume?) in our collective history. The truth will win – its just going to take a while.
Mr. Campbell….
Direct me to the factual evidence of any forms of corrupt gains by the State of Utah and Senator Hatch on this subject matter and I will gladly don my gladiator suit and join in with your supposition. I’m just a bit from the old school and not willing to behead even a known scoundrel without substantive evidence. Until such evidence surfaces I will employee the doctrine of fact and fairness in the court of public opinion.
That said, let me repeat…. I have little respect for the congress as a collective over much of the many past decades. I also, have little agreement and respect for the processes of the congress through their Rules and the applications of them. I despise the special interest corruption throughout all of governments three branches. I disagree with the consitutional mandate of representation by population, as it has evolved, in the House of Representatives. The socialist-progressives successes in consolidating and centralizing the economies and the populations has come to corrupt the constitutional mandate, leaving a handful of mostly “socialist-progressive” States with the [potential] of voting in a one-party government. And, the list goes on!
So, to answer your question, I work on the side of what [I believe] to be factually right and against the side of what I believe to be factually wrong, in conjunction with what I believe the constitution intended for the parmeters of how the federal government was to function.
In conclusion, I happen to be one who believes the entire congress should be flushed down the toilet, includung Sen. Hatch and replaced with a congress who will take on the hard task of amending at least Article I, Section 8, Commerce Clause…..and the Rules of Congress in conjuction with looking at amending representation by population for the House, [similar] to that of the Senate.
With all due respect sir, your agitation regarding this relatively small budget item implies you have a dog in this fight.
If your only concern in this is supporting human beings venturing into space, I agree wholeheartedly with that – I watched the moon landing on a small black and white tv at my best friend’s cottage. I would love to see that space and human adventure resume, but our present course will not lead us there.
It does not take a rocket scientist to recognize that Mr Hatch is no rocket scientist. NASA seems hopelessly politicized – however full of good people I am sure. When a good proportion of politicians are engineers or even scientifically literate, their opinion regarding rocket design may be helpful. Most politicians are lawyers and they can’t even make good laws – assuming that would be the goal of an honest and intelligent lawyer.
I resist ad hominem arguments, but parsing complex issues involving politicians makes my brain hurt. I have better things to do. The assumption that most political decisions such as this are wrong or stupid is my rule of thumb. When it comes to politics and politicians my cynicism is boundless.
This is one of those areas of concern where you have to be technically knowledgeable about the subject matter to know what the truth is, and you have to be politically knowledgeable about the two Senators to come at the article from that point of view. Hatch has always had fairly strong conservative credentials, I believe, though he has been in D.C. a long time and may now be too cozy with the “go along to get along” philosophy that rots the soul of our political system. I guess this article is more for the cognoscenti than the average reader like me. For me, a clear explication of the technological alternatives (risks, benefits, costs and strategic purposes) would have helped a lot.
I’ve lived in Utah all my life and I was proud to have helped in turning Bennett out, Hatch is next on the list. I’m tired of blue blood Republicans. I hope Chaffetz comes around, I like him, but if he doesn’t he’ll be gone too. Bishop’s time should come soon also, he’s an ex-teacher which makes him very suspect to me, I doubt his conservative credentials. I have family that works for ATK and I’d hate to see it go, but, the good of the nation has to come first. These politicians have to come to terms with the fact that they have to change their ways and start doing what’s right for the nation, not their damned re-election. They have to start moral and rational decisions, not political ones, AND THEY HAVE TO WHAT’S RIGHT.
Attention Utah Tea Partiers! If you run someone in the primaries against that fool Hatch, I guarantee you’ll have my financial support.
Running back Tiki Barber recently advised Tom Pedulla connected with Us Today the soon-to-be-former Big has no less than 2 competitors about his / her narrow your search the Pittsburgh steelers along with the Buccaneers.Tiki can take out one of them. Ira Kaufman on the Tampa bay Tribune accounts which the Buccaneers do not have affinity for Barber.Regarding the Steelers, Ed Bouchette of your Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported the government financial aid Walk that the Rooneys will likely not prefer to provide Barber to be able to city, due to some extent for you to her relationship partner misadventures. With the corporation nonetheless endeavoring to place David Roethlisberger’s off-field indiscretions on the rear-view replicate, Barber could be more of the distraction when compared with her remaining basketball expertise would likely warrant everlasting.