Before the Congress recessed for the spring break, three new bills were introduced.  Two of the bills attempt to deal with the aftermath of Administrator Bolden's decisions on shuttle placement.  These two bills are particularly disturbing.   Both bills pander to "NASA states". The first bill, HR-1590, was introduced by Ms Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX).  Here is the text of the bill:

A BILL

To provide for the disposition of the Space Shuttle Discovery upon retirement.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SPACE SHUTTLE DISCOVERY.

The Space Shuttle Discovery shall be placed on display at the Space Center Houston in Houston, Texas, for a period of 15 years after retirement of the shuttle from service, after which time it shall be returned to Washington, DC.

The short answer to this is "no".  Again, Houston (for reasons already explained by myself and Wayne Hale) does not rate a shuttle.  Moreover, this is a ploy.  Once Discovery was "on station" in Houston it would be a logistical nightmare to move her 15 years from now.  Nice try, but no. The second bill, HR-1536, was introduced by Mr. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT). Here is the text of that bill:

A BILL

To provide for the disposition of the retiring Space Shuttles.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Space Shuttle Retirement Act'.

SEC. 2. SPACE SHUTTLE DISPOSITION.

The following locations shall be home to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's retiring Space Shuttles:

(1) The Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex in Florida shall be home to the Shuttle Atlantis.

(2) The California Science Center in Los Angeles, California, shall be home to the Shuttle Enterprise.

(3) The Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia shall be home to the Shuttle Discovery.

(4) Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, shall be home to the Shuttle Endeavour.

My question is, how much time, money, and resources are we going to spend on shuttle disposition?  You have one bill from a liberal democrat and another from a conservative republican who has major TEA Party support.  But follow me here, it will all make sense in a moment. The third bill, HR-1641, was introduced by Mr. Bill Posey (R-FL).  It also panders to NASA states and it is as puzzling as it is disturbing.  Here is the text of that bill:

A BILL

To direct the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to plan to return to the Moon and develop a sustained human presence on the Moon.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Reasserting American Leadership in Space Act' or the `REAL Space Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) The 109th Congress passed the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2005 overwhelmingly, establishing as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's priority human space flight goal: `To develop a sustained human presence on the Moon . . . to promote exploration, commerce, science, and United States preeminence in space as a stepping stone for the future exploration of Mars and other destinations.'.

(2) The 110th Congress overwhelmingly reaffirmed the vision of returning to the Moon as an integral part of exploring further into our solar system through the passage of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008, expressing support for `the broad goals of the space exploration policy of the United States, including the eventual return to and exploration of the Moon and other destinations in the solar system and the important national imperative of independent access to space'.

(3) The 111th Congress, in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2010, called for the development of a heavy lift capability of greater than 130 metric tons consisting of the Space Launch System (SLS) and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) to pursue exploration, yet fell short on explicitly stating a clear destination.

(4) The 112th Congress has reaffirmed this commitment to the development of a heavy lift capability.

(5) A sustained human presence on the Moon will allow astronauts and researchers the opportunity to leverage new technologies in addressing the challenges of sustaining life on another celestial body, lessons which are necessary and applicable as we explore further into our solar system, to Mars and beyond.

(6) A sustained human presence on the Moon would once again inspire and engage public interest in our space program, motivating young people to excel in the vital subjects of math and science, subjects in which American students lag behind our international competitors.

(7) A sustained human presence on the Moon would challenge American industry to continue to develop technologies that not only enhance our exploration programs but can be applied across all disciplines of science.

(8) The commercial applications of space technologies have had tens of billions of dollars in economic impact, including products from semiconductors and aircraft controls to scratch-resistant lenses and water purification systems.

(9) The healthcare technologies derived from our space program, such as the portable x-ray machine, the MRI, advanced life-saving diagnostics, and the implantable heart aid, have saved and improved countless lives.

(10) Space is the world's ultimate high ground, returning to the Moon and reinvigorating our human space flight program is a matter of national security.

(11) Technologies developed and sustained by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's human space flight program, such as liquid and solid rocket propulsion, environmental and life support systems, and communications, navigation, and control systems are important to our military.

[caption id="attachment_305" align="alignright" width="150" caption="Anatoly Perminov, the director of the Russian space agency wants to build a nuclear powered rocket."][/caption] (12) China and Russia, understanding the economic and strategic importance of human space flight, have declared their intentions of colonizing the Moon and are advancing their lunar exploration plans.

(13) It is strategically important that the United States possess and maintain the capabilities of unfettered operation in the space domain, and not cede the space domain to other nations.

SEC. 3. MISSION.

In accordance with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2005, which established as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's priority goal: `To develop a sustained human presence on the Moon . . . to promote exploration, commerce, science, and United States preeminence in space as a stepping stone for the future exploration of Mars and other destinations.', and in accordance with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008, which endorsed `the broad goals of the space exploration policy of the United States, including the eventual return to and exploration of the Moon and other destinations in the solar system and the important national imperative of independent access to space', the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall plan to return to the Moon by 2022 and develop a sustained human presence on the Moon, in order to promote exploration, commerce, science, and United States preeminence in space as a stepping stone for the future exploration of Mars and other destinations. The budget requests and expenditures of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall be consistent with achieving this goal.

Where is the money going to come from?  When any objective American looks at this bill they know it will not work.  It simply makes no sense to re-iterate something that has already been said.  NASA already lost 250 million this year in the budget, and while noble in thought, these goals cannot be achieved within the current organization of NASA.  There is too much bureaucracy.  NASA cannot even finish a 90 day report in 180 days.  What gives these three leaders of democracy any hope whatsoever NASA can accomplish the goals set forth in Mr. Posey's bill?

Look No Further

If you look closely these are three colleagues scratching each other's back.   One from Texas, one from Utah, and one from Florida.  The Bermuda Triangle of Space Flight.  If you are wondering where Alabama is, that is the whirlpool in the middle of the triangle. NASA has been aimlessly swimming around in this triangle for 30 years.  Desperately seeking a way out.  A way to move forward.  To grow.  To learn.  To inspire.  And continuously, NASA has been held back by congress.  While their intentions may be good, we are all familiar with the unintended consequences of laws. And this is why small outfits from universities are building moon probes.  This is how a small, new aerospace company can show up to Space Access 2011 and say, "I don't have a video, but I did bring working hardware".  I could go on and on about how the smaller organizations that are not saddled with bureaucracy and regulation consistently outperform NASA. The United States, and the world for that matter, needs a healthy, strong NASA.  The question is will the U.S. Congress recognize this and throw NASA a life  line out of the Bermuda Triangle? Only time will tell.