Talking Space with Don Beyer

On the future of manned moon missions, space debris, and Russia’s space station threats.

By
16

Good morning. It’s a busy week on Capitol Hill, but I’m in sunny Arizona for a few days. (We hope you’re also enjoying dinosaur bucket hat season.)

Spacing Out With Rep. Don Beyer

Virginia Democratic Rep. Don Beyer, who chairs the House subcommittee that handles space, kindly agreed to a Q&A with The Dispatch about the latest in space and where it intersects with Congress. The transcript that follows has been edited for length and clarity. (Special thanks to senior space editor Eric Berger at Ars Technica and space expert Rand Simberg for suggesting a few of the questions I asked Beyer.)

Haley: I watched some of last week’s hearing on the Artemis program to return to the moon. You mentioned that it’s important for you, when you’re talking to constituents or talking to appropriators, to be able to have a clear narrative about the goals and plans behind Artemis. 

Rep. Beyer: I get some of this from my wife. I consider her everyman in this sense, where she rebels against the idea that the billionaires are what we know about space, the vanity trips. And I say, “No, there’s incredibly important science, there’s the moon-to-Mars, that Artemis is not only helping us understand how physics and biology and chemistry work, but also satisfying the human aspiration for exploration.” But we’ve got to get that story. Because when we’re spending $21 billion-plus in the current budget, we’d better be able to defend it. 

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
16
By
Comments (16)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Barry Alexander

    SLS isn’t really a space program, it’s a jobs program. As that, it’s a success. As a space program, it’s ludicrous. Starship will have equal or better capacity at a fraction of the cost. And I wouldn’t bet against it getting to space before SLS (admittedly, I wouldn’t bet on it, either).

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Kevin M. James

    What Rep. Berger says about bipartisanship on the space committee does come through in the interview. Feels like ages since I’ve read such a normal, functional-seeming account of the legislative branch in action. Heartening for sure.

    Collapse
  3. Deanjens

    NASA is nowhere near .5% of GDP, and I'm doubtful it was 3% of GDP in the 1960s. I wonder whether he meant to say .5% of the federal budget, which is pretty close.

    Collapse
  4. David Bankes

    I really enjoyed this piece. Props for reaching out to Berger, too.

    Collapse
  5. learnin4life

    This feature of The Dispatch was an unexpected lagniappe which debuted after I began a subscription. What a joy to frequently examine aspects of our government which may not regularly make headlines, but are nevertheless interesting and vital. I routinely look forward to your articles and especially the interviews you conduct. Thank you for beefing up my understanding and appreciation of important matters that I often have less exposure to than the daily partisan rancor.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
      Haley Byrd Wilt vertical-nib Author

      This is so nice! Thank you for reading!

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Paul Britton

    An excellent piece as usual.

    Who cares about the space shuttle or the war against Ukraine or hate crimes — if they can just ban daylight savings time, I’ll be happy!

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Earl King

    I swear to god I would never ever vote for a Omnibus spending Bill. The first order of business for the House is Budgeting. Why can’t we have committee hearings, find out what’s working what is not working. Horse trade a little, then hold a vote.
    Pass the Bill up to the floor, then have time to read it, evaluate it, then hold the vote....People, this is not complicated. Oh I know the why....to many constituencies and frankly leadership, loves waving a wand and presenting a take it or leave it budget. The Speaker doesn’t want to give up power to committee chairs.... One of the caucuses at some point has to stand up and say regular order or nothing. Grow a pair. All sorts of special interest crap will be thrown in along with billions for Ukraine....and viola. It’s done and it’s wrong.

    Collapse
  8. Tim McElrath

    Great interview. And you’ve picked a great time to visit Arizona (other than the lack of spring training, of course). Welcome!

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    JohnM.

    That was a terrific interview, Haley. Glad you asked him about the status of Russian cooperation with the ISS, too. And the cherry on the cake? Why, the 'dinosaur bucket hat' image, of course. Thank you!

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Nick H

    Good interview. Very smart to get suggestions from Eric Berger - he knows his stuff. As for Congressman Breyer, he seems to be very aware of the various issues. Interesting that he would point out how Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop are all constituents of his. I'm sure that's just a coincidence that they would have offices in Virginia, right next to DC. It's not like their entire business model is built around government contracts. (Narrator: their entire business model is built around government contracts.) SLS is a perfect example of how bloated that system really is. 4.1 BILLION dollars per launch, and nothing about it is reusable. Well, except the space shuttle main engines that we'll be reusing for those first few launches. Using once and then dropping into the ocean, that is. If you count its previous incarnations as the Ares V, they've been working on SLS for 16 years now. In that same time SpaceX has designed and built the Falcon 1, Falcon 9 (five different versions), Falcon 9 heavy, and Starship. That last one is directly comparable to SLS in terms of launch capability, except it's fully reusable and you can be sure they're not going to wait two years between each launch. Oh, and the launch costs will be closer to 4 million than 4 billion.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Jack

      Why they don't use SpaceX is beyond me. Oh wait, no it's not. The answer is lobbyists.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Nick H

        To be fair there are some things that it wouldn't make sense for SpaceX to do. The Falcon 9 and Super Heavy are great, but it's good to have a few more tools than just those. Which is why it's nice to see Rocket Labs, Blue Origin, and many others trying to compete as well. Maybe if there are enough private launch options, they can lobby together and get NASA to stop building rockets and focus instead on what it does really well.

        Collapse
Load More