Sen. Cruz: ‘It’s Only Fitting That a Nation Born on the Last Frontier Should Continue to Lead the Way on the New Frontier’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness, today addressed the Department of Transportation Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC). There, he discussed the subcommittee’s efforts to address issues that directly affect the U.S. commercial space industry. 

“On space, I’ve been proud to work closely with the Democrats on my subcommittee,” Sen. Cruz said. “It is difficult to think of another major policy area where you have major legislation signed in 2015 by Barack Obama and in 2017 by Donald Trump. That should encourage everyone of the bipartisan agreement that exists on space. Whether Obama or Trump we were able to move forward with American leadership in space. I intend to continue to work to preserve that cooperation, preserve that leadership and continue to create an environment where commercial space flourishes and where America continues to lead the way.”

Sen. Cruz’s remarks may be viewed here and below: 

“It is wonderful to be here with you. It is a privilege to have a chance just to encourage you. To encourage you for everything you’re doing concerning commercial space. To encourage you for opening up new frontiers.

“In 1890 the Superintendent of the Census declared the end of the American Frontier by stating, ‘Up to and including 1880, the country had a frontier of settlement, but at present the unsettled area has been so broken into by isolated bodies of settlement that there can hardly be said to be a frontier line. In the discussion of its extent, its westward movement etc., it cannot, therefore, any longer have a place in the census reports.’

“The American vision of westward expansion that had been initiated 86 years earlier through the Lewis and Clark Expedition had been successful in leading the expansion of American commerce and settlement in a new territory that had not previously been chartered by American pioneers. 

“Last year, in chairing the Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness, we embarked on a series of hearings looking at reopening the American Frontier, but this time not looking west but looking upwards to the heavens which President Kennedy rightly referred to as ‘the New Frontier.’ And it’s only fitting that a nation born on the last frontier should continue to lead the way on the new frontier.

“It is my firmly held belief that the United States must continue to expand commerce and settlement into space and we need to do it first. This is an issue that not only impacts our global competitiveness but our national security. 

“Just consider the growing interest and investment that is taking place within the global space economy.

“According to a January 2017 report issued by the Niskanen Center, the global space economy amounted to $323 billion in 2015. That’s a lot of money. That’s more than some people earn in a whole year. Commercial infrastructure and systems accounted for 76 percent of that total and global space launch was responsible for $6 billion.

“The last report by the FAA in 2009 estimated that commercial space transportation and enabled industries generated $208.3 billion in economic activity.

“However, while the United States has the potential to grow a vibrant and competitive commercial space industry, and to continue growing that industry, there is always the real possibility that regulations and outdated policies may stifle innovation, restrict investment, and drive the American launch sector and non-traditional space activities to foreign countries abroad.

“For example, there needs to be a streamlined regulatory process from expendable rockets to reusable rockets. Current Air Force licensing requirements for expendables match those of the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) almost word for word.

“By contrast, Air Force and AST licensing requirement for reusable rockets are completely different from each other. This not only forces companies to have to comply with separate certification regimes that can be equally onerous but it ultimately penalizes innovative companies by creating excessive barriers to launching in the United States.

“We have also heard of the need for more efficient and streamlined processes for how we manage our national air space. While traditional aircraft have been the primary users of our national air space for decades, there is a growing need for a seamless integration of commercial space assets into our national airspace so the United States can keep pace as the launch cadence increases.

“Another example of concern is NOAA’s management of commercial remote sensing. NOAA is currently required by law to review commercial satellite imagery applications and to make determinations within 120 days of receiving the application. U.S. commercial satellite imagery providers, however, have reported to Congress that some companies have waited nearly three years for license approval to sell data from their satellite.

“Economist Milton Friedman once put it this way, ‘If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years you’d have a shortage of sand.’ 

“If Congress and the Trump administration do not continue to work aggressively to reduce, to eliminate, to streamline regulations, to fix processes in our government that are clearly broken, then we could one day wake up to see a shortage of commercial space companies instead of the vibrant industry that all of us are committed to.

“Recognizing the dynamic and innovative commercial space industry that has been growing in the United States, I made it a priority as my first act as Chairman of the Subcommittee to work hand in hand with Senator Bill Nelson in drafting the bipartisan Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 which was ultimately signed into law by President Obama.

“One of the key components of this legislation was extending the regulatory learning period to 2023. The regulatory learning period was initially enacted in 2004 and its extension prevents the FAA from implementing new commercial space regulations that could stifle innovation.

“This extension has been crucial to allowing companies to innovate and experiment with ways to operate more safely than if they were forced to adhere to the strict requirements of a uniform federal regulatory regime.

“So where do we go from here? We’ve made great progress in growing a commercial space industry through our last commercial space bill, we know that there is still work to be done.

"One of the biggest questions facing Congress is ‘who in the federal government should manage all non-traditional space activity moving forward?’

“There is a great debate that is raging between the Department of Transportation and the Department of Commerce, in who should have the lead in principle role. And at this point I would say I think there are good and serious arguments that can be made on both sides. As Chairman of the Subcommittee, I’ve been listening to arguments. One of the very kind remarks you made is the virtue of listening. Each of you do this for a living and are experts in space. And I’d be a fool not to learn and continue to learn from your continued expertise and judgement.

“My office has been working on legislation with Senators Nelson, Markey and Thune and we are exploring this question. And so I would say, many of you know Sean McLean, my staffer who covers these issues -- Sean wave for anyone who doesn’t know you -- we welcome your input on the question of ‘what is the right place?’ We want to streamline the regulatory process. Both commerce and transportation have important roles. What is your collective assessment? If we’re streamlining and centralizing, where is the better place to do it to unleash commercial space?

"Some of the players have picked an answer on one side, other players have picked an answer on the other side. For my part, I want to continue to receive input and guidance from the industry, from stakeholders, to make a determination, ‘what would make the biggest difference?’ Removing barriers and encouraging the maximum investment in commercial space and exploration.

“I will note though, regardless of that resolution of that question, one thing I think that is absolutely critical, is that the ISS remains a vital component of our national space program.

“In addition to working on new commercial space legislation, I am also working, and looking to introduce and move a multi-year NASA Reauthorization ideally in this Congress. In 2017, as you know, we passed the NASA Authorization Act, the first authorization of NASA in seven years.

“Like the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, that act earned bipartisan support from Democrats, from Republicans. It earned the support of all of the various states of parochial interest in Congress. For whatever reason, and I have trouble understanding it, there’s states other than Texas that think they have equities when it comes to space. We managed to navigate those divisions between the various states, between the various parties, even bigger, between the Senate and the House, and to get them together on a massive authorization bill that Donald Trump signed into law.

“My hope now, after one year authorization, is to work and to move forward on a multi-year authorization that can be bigger and bolder. The intent of that one is to maintain the bipartisan commitment of Congress to American leadership in space and in particular, among other things, to have what is now a unanimous commitment from both houses of Congress that we are going to Mars and America will lead the way. 

“But for the next step, NASA Authorization, we’re moving forward and I will say that I want to underscore my commitment to the International Space Station (ISS). As you know, there are a handful of voices that have suggested zeroing out federal support for the ISS in 2025. I think that proposal was ill advised. I think that proposal was contrary to federal law, the very terms in the NASA Authorization directed NASA to study the technical feasibility to continue the ISS at least into 2028, if not later. 

“I don’t have the math chops of many of the people in this room, but last I checked 2025 is a lot sooner than 2028. I recently held a series of hearings examining the future of the ISS, listening to the stakeholders, listening to the technical experts, and every witness that testified before our committee made clear that the station could go easily until 2025, easily to 2028, and most of the experts think 2030 or beyond are well within the scientific and technical feasibility. 

“We’ve invested over a $100 billion in the ISS, and I think it would be the height of foolishness to disregard that investment, and particularly before there is a reliable replacement in place. 

“China intends to have an operating space station in lower Earth orbit by 2022. We’ve seen from the Constellation to the Shuttle, the disaster that happens when America cancels one program without a reliable replacement in the wings. We end up acting as hitchhikers needing a ride in Russian rockets because we lack the capability to get to lower Earth orbit.

“That foolishness which we’ve seen from both Democrats and Republicans, it hasn’t been a partisan myopia, that foolishness should not be repeated with the ISS. If we were to end up in a scenario where in 2025 we deorbit the station, and the lone orbit station was a Chinese station, then it is more difficult to think of something more damaging to America’s leadership in space than literally seating it to the Chinese. 

“And, I want to make clear to everyone here, as long as I am Chairman of the Space subcommittee, and as long as Article I of the Constitution provides that appropriations will come from the Legislative branch, there will continue to be strong and resolute bipartisan support for the International Space Station.

“Let me make one final point. This is a time of partisan division. Our country is polarized right now. Sharp and angry. It seems on most issues, across the board, there’s not a lot of common ground. Both parties digging in, firing bazookas at each other. For many of us, it’s painful to watch. I continue to believe as Americans there’s much more that unites us than divides us. Yes, we will have differences on policy issues. Yes, we may have differences on what the best, top marginal tax rate should be. Those issues and debates, I believe should be discussed in a civil and respectful manner, focusing on substance and what actually gets the job done.

“The overwhelming majority of Americans share the same ultimate objectives. We want to see opportunity expand. We want to see prosperity expand. We want to see those who are struggling have a better opportunity to succeed and achieve the American Dream. We may disagree on the means to get there. But we share objectives and if we can stop the partisan mudslinging, the nastiness and personal attack, and focus on substance, we might even be able to find common solutions.

“Across the board, it may be some time before we get back to that. But the word of encouragement I want to give you, is there is one area that continues, and that is space. On space, I’ve been proud to work closely with the Democrats on my subcommittee. To work in harmony. To reach compromises. None of us get everything we want. If you want to work in a legislative branch, you’re not going to get everything you want. But we’ve been able to see bipartisan cooperation.

“It is difficult to think of another major policy area where you have major legislation signed in 2015 by Barack Obama and in 2017 by Donald Trump. That should encourage everyone of the bipartisan agreement that exists on space. Whether Obama or Trump we were able to move forward with American leadership in space.

“I intend to continue to work to preserve that cooperation, preserve that leadership and continue to create an environment where commercial space flourishes and where America continues to lead the way.”

###