“Strangling innovation in a new industry is surely not a good idea in a recession? Remember the light aircraft industry?”

The trick is to pitch the counter argument at what the guys at the top want to see – Obama in this case.

~Jon

OK, so how many people did do that, Jon? Maybe you’ve seen other instances, but I’ve only seen one–the usual suspect. I (and Clark and a few others who will remain nameless behind the scenes) simply thought that it was useful to point this out now, before it became more than a rumor and a fait accompli, and it was relatively easy to fight it.

It can’t be assumed that the Obama administration will be monolithic in it’s approach to various issues. No administration ever is.

Ironically, this new administration may be very receptive to the idea of increasing the scope of COTS and other private/government cooperative efforts. I say that because of the serious budget crunch we will be facing, and the fact that NASA has a propensity for unwittingly sabotaging its own programs through mission creep and cost overruns.

While Obama and friends appear to have a flair for the grandiose, it likely won’t apply to the space program. This could be a good opening for insisting that NASA, DoD and DOT promote less costly access to space more aggressively. The argument should be that lower-cost space access and greater private sector involvement would multiply the options and flexibility as to what can be done in space. This latter point should be more important than big Moon/Mars missions.

That’s not to endorse him, to be sure, but merely an observation on the obvious: AST is proven unable to act in a reasonable and rational fashion as it develops regulations for the industry.