Opening Floor Statement on H.R. 2262, the SPACE Act
May 21, 2015
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in opposition to H.R. 2262, the SPACE Act of 2015. And I am actually quite saddened by that. It is not the outcome I had hoped for. Like the gentleman from California, I share in the enthusiasm and the wonder of space.
I would note that the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee has just cut $230 million from the President’s request for these activities.
It was my sincere belief that the Science, Space, and Technology Committee could have reached bipartisan agreement on a commercial space bill. Indeed, during the past few weeks, there was a concerted attempt on both sides of the committee to reach common ground on tackling these issues and developing a bipartisan bill.
However, with the backdrop of meeting the majority’s floor schedule as the top priority, there was insufficient time given to negotiate a compromise before last week’s full committee markup.
Mr. Chairman, I think most of us on both sides of the aisle share in the excitement and enthusiasm about the commercial space industry, and we want it to succeed. Indeed, hundreds of millions of dollars have been paid by taxpayers into this industry to get it off the ground. American taxpayers have a lot of skin in the game when it comes to the success of commercial space.
Since the very beginning, the Federal Government has supported the private space industry, at both the State and Federal level, with funding, data, and guidance with best practices.
Since the Commercial Space Launch Act was passed in 1984, followed by the Commercial Space Launch Act Amendments of 1988 and 2004, it is clear that the commercial space industry has made significant strides.
Even in 2004, few would have predicted that NASA would be relying today on commercial space transportation to deliver critical supplies, spare parts, and research material to the International Space Station.
Who knows what developments will occur in the commercial space arena in the coming years. What we do know is that it won’t just be commercial cargo transported into space; in fact, it will also be people. That is why it is up to Congress to develop responsible commercial space policies that both encourage the commercial space industry and protect those who participate as the users of the industry’s services and activities.
Sadly, this bill just doesn’t measure up to that responsibility. Instead, it takes a fundamentally unbalanced approach to the issues facing the commercial space launch industry.
Two key areas should concern all Members, Republicans and Democrats alike.
The first area pertains to safety. A moratorium on the FAA’s authority to regulate the safety of crew and spaceflight participants was initially included in the Commercial Space Launch Act Amendments of 2004 in order to allow the commercial space industry the time to acquire experience and data that would inform the development of safety regulations.
However, initial expectations of industry progress simply were not realized. So in 2012, Congress extended the moratorium for 3 more years as part of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. The end of that learning period is set to expire on September 30, 2015.
H.R. 2262, the bill in front of us, would extend the learning period to December 31, 2025, a decade-long moratorium on FAA’s ability to even start proposing a safety framework.
This is very dangerous. This unprecedented regulation-free period for a decade for the commercial and human spaceflight industry puts no pressure on the industry to establish industry consensus standards, standards that could potentially be used as self-regulation measures for the industry.
In addition to providing the industry with 10 years of no safety regulations, H.R. 2262 negatively affects the rights of individuals on important safety matters by requiring spaceflight passengers to waive liability against launch providers and other parties.
What that means is that spaceflight participants have to waive their rights to sue the launch provider and related parties for claims, even if there is negligence involved.
Mr. Chair, H.R. 2262 puts policy in place that favors industry over policy that ensures balanced consideration for those people the industry will serve. That is a position that I and all of my Democratic colleagues on the committee oppose.
Another area of concern pertains to space resource utilization, such as asteroid mining.
Mr. Chair, there is merit to positioning ourselves to answer questions associated with space mining, the property rights that accrue from such activities, and the harmonization with our treaty obligations.
However, establishing prescriptive policies, as H.R. 2262 would do, is simply premature.
To preclude the proverbial placement of the cart before the horse, it would be prudent to establish an interagency review to help identify appropriate roles and responsibilities and a proposed organizational structure for the Federal Government's oversight and licensing of commercial space resource exploration and utilization.
And it would also be prudent, Mr. Chair, to hold hearings on these issues and on this legislation, as well as to have a subcommittee markup, what we sometimes refer to as regular order. H.R. 2262 skips these steps.
Proponents of the space resources utilization provisions in H.R. 2262 argue that the range of issues has been adequately vetted and reviewed by the executive branch.
Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that while several individuals in the executive branch have offered technical drafting comments in response to queries about the bill, no Federal agency has taken a position on the bill.
Indeed, the administration says: ``While the administration strongly supports the bill’s efforts to facilitate innovative new space activities by U.S. companies, such as the commercial exploration and utilization of space resources to meet national needs, the administration is concerned about the ability of U.S. companies to move forward with these initiatives absent additional authority to ensure continuing supervision of these initiatives by the U.S. Government as required by the Outer Space Treaty.”
In addition to these concerns, we have received a number of letters from legal scholars, consumer interest groups, and attorneys who have raised concerns or are opposed to H.R. 2262 as written. I am submitting for the Record letters from Professor Joanne Gabrynowicz, Director of the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air and Space Law; the American Association for Justice; the Center for Justice & Democracy; Consumer Watchdog; the National Consumers League; the Network for Environmental and Economic Responsibility of United Church of Christ; Protect All Children’s Environment; and Public Citizen.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2262 is an unbalanced bill that simply doesn’t adequately protect the public’s interest, whether in matters pertaining to the safety of the general public or in matters pertaining to the safety of the future consumers and customers of the industry, and incorporates prescriptive provisions on space resource utilization that are indeed premature.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my fellow Members to oppose H.R. 2262, and I reserve the balance of my time.
H.R. 2262, the SPACE Act passed the House by a vote 284-133 on May 21st, 2015
