Lawmakers Questioning NASA Manager’s Removal

[Rick]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/sc...gewanted=print

Senator John D. Rockefeller IV in the Senate subway after a vote on Capitol Hill. Senator Max Baucus sat in the foreground.

Members of Congress have asked the inspector general for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to look into whether the NASA leadership is undermining the agency’s moon program.

The request, from Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia and chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, the committee’s ranking Republican, was sent Thursday, one day after NASA removed the head of the program, Jeffrey M. Hanley.

The program has spent $10 billion over the last five years in an effort to send astronauts back to the moon. However, the Obama administration has concluded that it is too expensive and has proposed canceling it in the budget for the 2011 fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.

Mr. Rockefeller and Ms. Hutchison asked Paul K. Martin, the NASA inspector general, to “examine whether this or other recent actions by NASA were intended or could reasonably have been expected to foreclose the ability of Congress to consider meaningful alternatives” to the president’s proposed policy, which invests heavily in new space technologies and turns the launching of astronauts over to private companies.

Congress has not yet agreed to the changes and inserted into this year’s budget legislation a clause that prohibits NASA from canceling the program, called Constellation, or starting alternatives without Congressional approval.

Mr. Hanley had been publicly supported by Maj. Gen. Charles F. Bolden Jr., the NASA administrator, and other NASA officials, but he may have incurred displeasure by publicly talking about how Constellation could be made to fit into the slimmed-down budgets that President Obama has proposed for NASA’s human spaceflight endeavors.

The senators’ letter cites an e-mail message from Douglas R. Cooke, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration systems, to Mr. Hanley on May 21 that told him to focus on items that could be used in the president’s proposed space policy and put less priority on other work.

“It’s enough for us to be extraordinarily concerned,” said a Congressional staff member, who was authorized to speak only anonymously. “It’s not the smoking gun, but it’s smoking. We just want the inspector general to follow the path and report back to us what he’s finding.”

In response to an earlier request from members of the House of Representatives, the General Accountability Office concluded last week that NASA study groups looking into how the proposed policy could be carried out did not violate the Congressional ban on starting new programs.

The office is still investigating a second complaint, that NASA is handicapping Constellation contractors by telling them they need to hold back money to cover costs in case the program is canceled.

[JimMcDade]

Although the Executive Branch appoints the NASA Administrator and his/her deputy, NASA is an independent agency of the federal government that was created by Congressional action, and is therefore not a part of the executive branch. Therefore, Congress is is authorized to examine the decisions and actions of the NASA Administrator and the managers who answer to the executives who work at NASA HQ.

Congress creates the statutes that defines the goals toward which NASA must work, not the President. The President can ask Congress to authorize his requests pertaining to NASA, but NASA cannot do things that Congress has not authorized by statute (law). The previous two statements unambiguously describe the legal foundation that has caused Congress to question Bolden's actions, actions that appear to support an illegal, unauthorized intervention by the White House intended to prevent or forestall NASA from carrying out the execution of it's legally authorized mission.

Those are the facts, now my opinion: These lawmakers are rightfully concerned about possible abuse of power by the President as NASA appears to be implementing unauthorized (illegal) policy and goal changes. The White House is attempting to execute an illegal power-grab that will allow it to implement a NASA policy created behind closed doors, without credible peer review nor adequate attempts to verify the cost of implementing that policy, by a small, elite group.

[JimMcDade]

It is the “independent agency” status of NASA that explains “how” the Democrats & Republicans Congress- united as they are in opposition to the Obama scheme- can continue to authorize & fund Project Constellation by a continuing series of resolutions in spite of Bolden’s & Obama’s antics.


The unsatisfactory testimony and evasive question responses given by Bolden & company during the series of House & Senate hearings explain “why” Congress is in opposition to the ill-conceived, political crony-pushed Obama NASA policy.

[Me2]

Although the Executive Branch appoints the NASA Administrator and his/her deputy, NASA is an independent agency of the federal government that was created by Congressional action, and is therefore not a part of the executive branch. Therefore, Congress is is authorized to examine the decisions and actions of the NASA Administrator and the managers who answer to the executives who work at NASA HQ.

Congress creates the statutes that defines the goals toward which NASA must work, not the President. The President can ask Congress to authorize his requests pertaining to NASA, but NASA cannot do things that Congress has not authorized by statute (law). The previous two statements unambiguously describe the legal foundation that has caused Congress to question Bolden's actions, actions that appear to support an illegal, unauthorized intervention by the White House intended to prevent or forestall NASA from carrying out the execution of it's legally authorized mission.

How f'ing clueless can you be? NASA is part of the Executive Branch, period. All federal gov't agencies are. They work for the president and not congress. The president sets the policy but congress holds the pursestrings. It is an "independent" agency because it is not part of a cabinet department. NASA was form by a president and not congress. Congress only approved it. Again, McDade does not know what he is talking about. You need some remedial schooling in civics, not to mention spaceflight history. Also, some churching would help with your constant stretching of truth, aw, what the heck, I am just going to say it, your blatant lying.

[spacefan]

Hanley broke the cardinal rule i.e. don't embarras the boss. He may have friends in congress but he answers to Bolden. It seems clear that he has been insubordinate no leader is going to tolerate that especially not an ex marine general. Constellation may be the Law but is surely not sustainable given the current financial climate.

[klydemorris]

How 'bout this- Hanley broke the BoldenObama rule- he told truth in public. He also may have leaked the Bolden e-mail to to KBH.

[Rick]

Well put. He definitely was not in lock-step with his boss nor the administration.