3 Congressmen Trying To Tie Up SpaceX

An anonymous reader writes: Phil Plait reports that a trio of U.S. Congressmen are asking NASA to investigate what they call "an epidemic of anomalies" at SpaceX. They sent a memo (PDF) demanding that SpaceX be held accountable to taxpayers for mission delays stemming from the development of new rockets. Plait notes, "[A]s a contractor, the rules are different for them than they would be if NASA themselves built the rockets, just as the rules are for Boeing or any other contractor. In fact, as reported by Space News, NASA didn't actually pay for the development of the Falcon 9; Elon Musk did." He adds, "Another reason this is silly is that every rocket ever made has undergone problems; they are fiendishly complex machines and no design has ever gotten from the drafting board to the launch pad without issues. Sure, SpaceX has experienced launch delays and other problems, but the critical thing to remember is that those problems are noted, assessed, and fixed sometimes within hours or minutes." Plait accuses the congressmen of trying to bury private spaceflight under red tape in order to protect established industries in their own states.

Comments

Re:What?

[TapeCutter]

Where I part ways with the "government doesn't create jobs" people is that the view is too extreme.

Indeed without government there would be no property law and all trade would devolve into complex barter. Governments create markets, markets create jobs. Without modern markets (property law, etc) passenger planes would not exist. The most important role for the government is that of market umpire, the US senate abuses that role by manipulating the rules to favour the campaign sponsors. This practice makes it an "unfree" market in the sense that some people are more "free" to participate in the market than others.

Aside from defining and umpiring economic markets, federal governments should assist business by building and maintaining the infrastructure that allows them to compete on an international level, road, rails, bridges, ports, spaceports, research centers, etc. It's actually more efficient from a taxpayer POV to let the government do these things (plus health care). However the US Senate doesn't work like that, questions such as; do we beef up the levies in new orleans or build a bridge to nowhere in Alaska are answered by asking who's sponsor gets the contract, the social need for the project is all but irrelevant.