From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: One Small Step for a Space Activist... (Vol. 4 No. 1)
Followup-To: talk.politics.space
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:33:16 GMT



           One Small Step for a Space Activist...
                 Vol. 4 No. 1 - January 1993
                             By
                  Allen Sherzer & Tim Kyger

The San Diego L5 Chapter and David Anderman have come up with a
good idea on how to get Lunar probes back to the Moon. The
idea is encapsulated in the Lunar Data Purchase Act (LDPA) which
has been circulating and which will hopefully be introduced soon.

The LDPA would authorize the Administrator of NASA to
purchase from the private sector maps of the Moon (chemical,
terrain, or gravity). The requirements are simple enough
that a 'smaller, faster, cheaper' probe can accomplish the
task, which means that the NASA Administrator can fund LDPA
activities by simply reprogramming the small amounts of money
needed. Note that the bill is an authorization, NOT an
appropriation. LDPA may also specify resolution and
other details. This approach is far more likely to gain
us our goals then the course we have taken in
recent years for three reasons.

First, by emphasizing commercial procurement of data and not
hardware the way is left open for more creative solutions. In
addition, those solutions will not be bogged down by the NASA
requirements process. Second, a vendor doesn't get paid unless
they provide the data; there will be no incentives for dragging
out the effort.

Third, and most important, is that the bill gets the job
done by using our strengths and not our weaknesses. To
understand how this is so, one must understand the
difference between an Authorization and an Appropriation.

Like the rest of the government, there are a series of
checks and balances which apply to getting money from the
Feds. Each house has Budget Committee which sets overall
guidelines for outyear spending. Each year the budget
committees pass a budget (usually) early in spring
to guide Congressional spending.

Next comes Authorization Committees. These committees are
where the experts live. Their main function is to be
knowledgeable about their area and judge which programs are
worth funding and which aren't worth funding. They pass on
the merits of projects, both blessing for funding and
providing guidelines on how much can be spent.

Finally, the Appropriations Committees. They decide
how much money the government will spend each year and
allocate it to subcommittees who appropriate funds among
various projects. They are guided by the Authorization Bill;
they cannot appropriate funds to projects not authorized or
appropriate more than authorized. Authorization is a work
order, Appropriations is the check.

That, of course, is the theory. In practice it doesn't work
that way. In many cases, authorization bills are passed very
late; usually too late to do any good. This makes appropriation
bills de facto authorization bills. Thus, the House Appropriations
Committees a very powerful place and its chair arguably the most
powerful person in the government.

Because of their power, space activists have spent a lot of effort
trying to pressure Appropriators to do what we want. Several times
we have even shut down the office phone of the Subcommittees responsible
for funding NASA with calls to fund SEI. These efforts have, to quote
the bard, been full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. This is because
we have no power. We are out-spent and out-classed by the older
Veterans and Housing interest groups which compete with us for funds.

So where are we strong? Where have we actually made a difference? The
answer is in the House Subcommittee on Space and in the full Science
and Technology Committee. Here activists have been instrumental in
getting bills passed covering areas from commercial launch service
purchase to patent protection for space research. Twice the Committee
Chair (Rep. Brown (D-CA)) has received important election help from space
activists, and many members on the Committee share our agenda.

This brings us back to the LDPA. By AUTHORIZING the program
and keeping costs down, we can do the precursor work which
the Appropriations Committee to date refuse to fund. The
thing to remember is that LDPA accomplishes it by using our
strengths, not our weaknesses. This is an example of working
faster, better, cheaper; smarter, not harder.

                     Legislative Roundup

                          SSTO/SSRT
Freshmen Orientation is taking off. Among others Rep.
Torkelson will soon be visited by the Boston chapter. Several
other chapters are sending out letters and making initial
contacts. If you want to help, contact Tim Kyger at (202) 225-8459.

On the inside, Clinton's new Science Advisor is John Gribbin who was
at the Office of Technology Assessment. He is neutral about SSTO but
most of his staff are strong supporters. Gore will likely be calling
the shots but this is good news.

                      Commercial Space
The start of the 103RD Congress is near. Time again to
continue the process of chipping away at government
impediments to commercial space activity. Expect to see some
of the tax provisions which didn't make it into last year's
NASA bill to be re-introduced. If Clinton is serious about
targeted tax cuts to promote investment then odds of
passage, even if only as an amendment may be pretty good.

Thing to do:
1. Do you have any ideas on what would be good to include in
future commercial space legislation? If so, drop a note to
Barry Berringer, Care Of Rep. Robert Walker.
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------103 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space