NASA Administrator Names: Getting Stuck In The Rumor Mill
Keith’s note: A cautionary note with regard to possible NASA Administrator names being circulated, self-promoted, and otherwise tossed around – from the Book “New Moon Rising” that the late Frank Sietzen and I wrote back in 2004:
“As the new Administration continued to fill in open positions, the job of NASA Administrator seemed to get scant attention. One name had circulated with some frequency in late 2001: former New Mexico Senator and Astronaut Harrison “Jack” Schmitt. It wasn’t so much that Schmitt was seen as an obvious answer as much as it was the fact that his name had been tossed into the round robin that the media tends to stir up at times such as this.
In this case this happened in an AP wire story just before Christmas. With everyone heading out of town, no one was around to knock Schmitt’s name off the list. As such the story continued to circulate – and Schmitt’s name stayed in play. People started to get used to hearing his name. Schmitt would later say that he had gotten several calls during that period – but that they were from mid- to low-level staffers that were seeking to confirm his location and how to contact him.
A rather humorous consequence of this way of circulating names occurred in January 2001. The National Air and Space Museum had hosted a special event honoring science fiction author Sir Arthur C. Clarke and the film “2001: A Space Odyssey”. Part of the festivities included a showing of the newly restored film at the old location of the Newseum in Rosslyn, Virginia.
Opening the showing was a taped presentation made several weeks earlier by Clarke at his home in Sri Lanka. Not knowing precisely who would be in attendance, Clarke had spoken to who he thought might be there. Clarke welcomed “Dan Goldin” adding “I understand your successor Jack Schmitt is there with you.” This resulted in a large chuckle in the audience given that Goldin was not present – and Schmitt was – and he was as much in the dark about the process as anyone else.
The explanation for Clarke’s comments may be what Space Frontier Foundation’s Rick Tumlinson has suggested. Tumlinson had visited Clarke in Sri Lanka several weeks before and had given Clarke a lay of the land with respect to the political landscape. At the time Tumlinson was traveling Schmitt’s name was still echoing in the media.”
Keith,
What does it feel like to be a member of ‘the media’ in situations/at times like this? Do you feel as if you are comrades in arms (of a sort) or do each of you feel like “Oh, I’m DIFFERENT, I’m certainly not one of ‘them’!”
Most curious to gain your insight…
Well, I was just talking to one of my comrades about this specific topic. We all know that what we write can affect things in ways that might not otherwise be the case. So we need to think carefully about what we write and it be accurate with speculation and opinion clearly separated from what is stated as fact.
Well. That certainly makes you different, Keith.
That is why I read NASA Watch, it is still following the best practices of professional journalism.
Administrator sweepstakes is fun, especially in Washington, but the reality is that it is unlikely anyone will be named for a while, it is just not that important in relation to other Presidential appointments.
And the importance of government space programs like NASA is likely to decline further as space commerce moves forward. Luxembourg’s announcement that it will be proposing a law to allow firms in Luxembourg to mine the Moon, NEOs, and other Celestial Bodies under the same interpretation of the OST as the U.S. Space Resources Act of 2015 will likely be seen as the more important event of 2016 by future space historians than who the next NASA Administrator is since it marks major progress in opening space development up to free enterprise.
So you are saying that what has been holding space development back is the proposing of a Law?
It has been one factor. Firms now know if they collect lunar rocks and bring them to Earth they will own them. Eliminating uncertainty in ownership of space resources will help firms close their business models.
The ITC establishing basic rules on frequency allocation and orbital slots was a factor in creating the communications satellite industry.
BTW, one of the factors that created the Industrial Revolution was the emergence of patent laws in England in the late 17th Century creating intellectual property rights. Knowing that you would get royalties if you invent something useful was a real stimulus to advancing technology.
Also laws that emerged in the late 16th and early 17th Century in Holland and England which limited investor liability in a business venture built the large trading firms like the Dutch East into engines of wealth creation and enabled the settling of North America. Laws that were passed by states in the late 19th Century allowing corporations to own corporations made it possible to assemble the capital needed to build the large multinations of the 20th Century.
Historically good laws create wealth and stimulate technological progress. Bad laws create poverty.
You lost me. What does this have to do with media reporting of potential NASA administrators?
Just trying to add some perceptive.
As you note at this early stage in the Administrator process the noise to signal rational is extremely high, so high it is easy to think the noise is the signal as in the case of Senator Schmitt. And it will probably stay high until next year since its not a critical appointment. Meanwhile folks are so busy trying to sort out the signal from the noise they are missing other signals that are likely to be more important in the long run.
I know many still feel the future of space rests on NASA, making its Administrator’s views key, but that is rapidly changing. Jeff Bezos will continue his development of his space program with or without NASA. Same with Elon Musk. And Robert Bigelow, Paul Allen and Sir Richard Branson. The pace may be different, and direction different, but NASA is no longer the only game in town. Now that its legal to mine Celestial Bodies that pace of change will increase and as it does the importance of NASA will decline further.
Indeed, I am currently far more interested in who will run the FAA AST as the rules they draft on space resources and economic activity in space over the next few years will have a far greater impact than whatever the new NASA program of the day is since they will define parameters of the emerging Solar System economy. Remember, NASA’s budget is a mere $18 billion a year, basically just noise, compared to the $500-600 billion spent annually by firms in the energy and mining industry looking for new resources to develop.