6
   

NASA has become a transition problem for Obama

 
 
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 10:21 am
NASA has become a transition problem for Obama
posted by Robert Block
Dec 10, 2008

CAPE CANAVERAL " NASA administrator Mike Griffin is not cooperating with President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team, is obstructing its efforts to get information and has told its leader that she is “not qualified” to judge his rocket program, the Orlando Sentinel has learned.

In a heated 40-minute conversation last week with Lori Garver, a former NASA associate administrator who heads the space transition team, a red-faced Griffin demanded to speak directly to Obama, according to witnesses.

In addition, Griffin is scripting NASA employees and civilian contractors on what they can tell the transition team and has warned aerospace executives not to criticize the agency’s moon program, sources said.

Griffin’s resistance is part of a no-holds-barred effort to preserve the Constellation program, the delayed and over-budget moon rocket that is his signature project.

Chris Shank, NASA’s Chief of Strategic Communications, denied that Griffin is trying to keep information from the team, or that he is seeking a meeting with Obama. He also insisted that Griffin never argued with Garver.

“We are working extremely well with the transition team,” he said.

However, Shank acknowledged Griffin was concerned that the six-member team " all with space policy backgrounds " lack the engineering expertise to properly assess some of the information they have been given.

Garver refused comment about her conversation with Griffin -- and his remark that she is “not qualified” -- during a book-publication party at NASA headquarters last week. Obama’s Chicago office " which has sent similar transition teams to every federal agency " also had no comment.

People close to Garver, however, say that she has confirmed “unpleasant” exchanges with Griffin and other NASA officials. “Don’t worry, they have not beaten me down yet,” she e-mailed a colleague.

And this week, Garver told a meeting of aerospace representatives in Washington that “there will be change” to NASA policy and hinted that Obama would name a new administrator soon, according to participants.

Those who spoke for this article, including a member and staff in Congress, NASA employees, aerospace executives and consultants, spoke only on condition that their names not be used.

Garver’s team is one of dozens of review panels that over the last few weeks have descended on every government agency. Armed with tough questions, they are scrutinizing programs, scouring budgets and hunting for problems that may confront a new president.

Though their job is to smooth the transition between administrations, their arrival also brings a certain level of anxiety, particularly when programs face tough questions, as at NASA.

Said John Logsdon, a George Washington University professor who co-wrote the book honored at the NASA party, "There is a natural tension built into this situation... Mike is dead-on convinced that the current approach to the program is the right one. And Lori’s job is to question that for Mr. Obama. The Obama team is not going to walk in and take Mike’s word for it.”

The Bush White House has pledged cooperation, and many agency leaders have told staff to cooperate fully. Griffin himself sent a memo urging employees “to answer questions promptly, openly and accurately.”

At the same time, he made clear he expected NASA employees to stay on message.

For example, transition-team interviews have been monitored by NASA officials “taking copious notes,” according to congressional and space-community sources. Employees who met with the team were told to tell their managers about the interview.

The tensions are due to the fact that NASA’s human space flight program is facing its biggest crossroads since the end of the Apollo era in the 1970s. The space shuttle is scheduled to be retired in 2010, and the next-generation Constellation rockets won’t fly before 2015.

Nearly four years ago, President Bush brought in Griffin to implement a plan to return astronauts to the moon by 2020 as a prelude to going to Mars. Griffin and his team selected Constellation, with its NASA-designed Ares I rocket and Orion capsule, as cheaper and safer than existing rockets. Constellation " especially Ares 1 -- is the center of what Griffin sees as his legacy to return humans to the frontiers of space.

Griffin has made no secret that he would like to stay on but only, as he recently told Kennedy Space Center workers, "under the right circumstances," including being able to finish Constellation.

But budget problems and technical issues have created growing doubts about the project. Griffin has dismissed these as normal rocket development issues, but they’ve clearly got the transition team’s attention.

When team members arrived three weeks ago, they asked the agency, among other things, to quantify how much could be saved by canceling Ares I. Though they also asked what it would take to accelerate the program, the fact that the team could even consider scrapping the program was enough to spur Griffin and his supporters into action

According to industry officials, Griffin started calling heads of companies working for NASA, demanding that they either tell the Obama team that they support Constellation or refrain from talking about alternatives.

The companies, worried that Griffin may remain and somehow punish them if they ignore his wishes, have by and large complied.

One consultant said that when Garver invited “several” mid-level aerospace executives to speak to the team, their bosses told them not to go and warned that anything said had to be cleared first with NASA because Griffin had demanded it.

Documents and e-mails obtained by the Sentinel confirm NASA’s efforts to coordinate what’s said.

A Dec. 3 e-mail to Constellation contractors from Sandy Coleman, an executive with Alliant Tech Systems, the prime contractor on the Ares I, said that Griffin wanted NASA to pre-review any materials given to the team.

“Phil [McAlister, the NASA contact for the transition team] relayed a request by Mike Griffin that if we plan to provide the Transition Team any reports or studies that were performed under NASA contracts that we provide them a copy first … ,” Coleman wrote.

The e-mail followed two teleconferences set up by Shank and another NASA official, Gale Allen. According to documents produced from the teleconferences, the point was to “to develop a strategy for promoting the continuation of Constellation in the next administration.”

Among the ideas agreed on: tell the team that an Obama White House “could take ownership of the [Constellation] program and ‘re-brand’ it as their own with minor tweaks.”

Another set of talking points, presented during a Nov. 21 teleconference, was called “Staying the Course on Constellation.” Among the points: Ares 1 had been thoroughly studied “and is sound” " and any change would make NASA look bad. “If NASA appears to be wavering by not staying the course … this would cause a loss of public and stakeholder confidence in NASA,” it said.

Shank said that the contractors " not NASA -- had requested the teleconferences. “We do not seek to intimidate at all," he said.

Tensions were on public display last week at the NASA library, as overheard by guests at a book party.

According to people who were present, Logsdon, a space historian, told a group of about 50 people he had just learned that President John F. Kennedy’s transition team had completely ignored NASA.

Griffin responded, in a loud voice, “I wish the Obama team would come and talk to me.”

Alan Ladwig, a transition team member who was at the party with Garver, shouted out: “Well, we’re here now, Mike.”

Soon after, Garver and Griffin engaged in what witnesses said was an animated conversation. Some overheard parts of it.

“Mike, I don’t understand what the problem is. We are just trying to look under the hood,” Garver said.

“If you are looking under the hood, then you are calling me a liar,” Griffin replied. “Because it means you don’t trust what I say is under the hood.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 6 • Views: 1,234 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 10:31 am
How to shoot yourself in the foot...
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 10:37 am
I wonder how many NASA employees own guns? I wonder if O-boy will fire them all?
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 10:57 am
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
“If you are looking under the hood, then you are calling me a liar,” Griffin replied. “Because it means you don’t trust what I say is under the hood.

Translation: "I'm scared of you looking under the hood, you shouldn't trust what I say is under the hood, 'cause if I didn't have something to hide, I wouldn't be fighting it."
cjhsa
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 11:25 am
@cjhsa,
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3...

Hey Sam! Could you abort the countdown please? We just found out you're a gun owner, and, well, we're gonna have to let you go.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 01:08 pm
@DrewDad,
Over reaction like the one Griffin displayed says "you can't look under the hood." Funny, that!
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 02:17 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
Quote:
“If you are looking under the hood, then you are calling me a liar,” Griffin replied. “Because it means you don’t trust what I say is under the hood."

If he isn't proud enough of what's under the hood to want to show it off, then they should be asking what's under the hood.

Griffin should have put on a big show about how proud they were of everything they are doing, instead of acting like they are afraid of anyone seeing what they are doing. This guy should stick to building rockets and keep out of management/politics.

0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 04:05 pm
Griffin should be told to resign immediately. He thinks that he is beyond oversight, the lack of which has brought this country to its knees.

Moreover, NASA needs to have an overall cost/benefit analysis by an independent, nonpartisan commission. The country cannot afford the billions we are spending on space matters.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 04:09 pm
@Advocate,
GROAN; not another commission...
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 04:15 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:
The country cannot afford the billions we are spending on space matters.

Oh, please. NASA is a tiny portion of the budget. Go work on entitlements, which are the real budget-busters.

If you want to cut NASA's budget, then please make sure not to use anything that touches a satellite. No CNN for you. Not yours.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 04:21 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad, You got that right! The way our government wastes money is the crime, not the funding for NASA. Heck, we're spending some ten billion dollars every month in Iraq in addition to sacrificing our military there, for what? We also give billions to some countries that are not justified; charity begins at home when many middle class families are losing their jobs and homes.

Our government has always been screwed in the head; no different now while they bailout all these companies that don't help main street.

0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 04:31 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

Moreover, NASA needs to have an overall cost/benefit analysis by an independent, nonpartisan commission.


That is exactly what Obama has tasked his economic team to do.

Quote:
"In these challenging times, when we are facing both rising deficits and a sinking economy, budget reform is not an option. It is an imperative," Obama said. "We cannot sustain a system that bleeds billions of taxpayer dollars on programs that have outlived their usefulness or exist solely because of the power of a politician, lobbyist or interest group. We simply cannot afford it.

"This isn't about big government or small government. It's about building a smarter government that focuses on what works," he said.

...

He repeated a campaign pledge that the team would go through the federal budget "page by page, line by line -- eliminating those programs we don't need and insisting that those that we do need operate in a sensible, cost-effective way."

Obama said his "first class team" was developed to prevent his administration from stumbling into an economy hobbled by waste and misdirected priorities.

"We don't want to continue programs that aren't working in making people healthier. The same is true for education and the same is true for defense and social spending," he said.

Obama added that he is counting on cooperation from all sides, since everyone is hurting as a result of the economic downturn. He noted that he has gotten "bipartisan accolades" for the economic team that he's put together.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/11/25/obama-democrats-plan-b-economic-package/
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Water on the moon??? - Discussion by mysteryman
Should NASA go to Mars or back to the Moon? - Discussion by rosborne979
Organic compounds confirmed on Mars - Discussion by rosborne979
Nasa's EM Drive: Peer Reviewed Paper - Discussion by edgarblythe
Antares on its way again - Question by ehBeth
NASA finds 100 new exoplanets - Discussion by cicerone imposter
 
  1. Forums
  2. » NASA has become a transition problem for Obama
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/15/2019 at 07:03:08