[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 77 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E988]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


  H.R. 1601; THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                         HON. ROBERT S. WALKER

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 10, 1995
  Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing H.R. 1601, The 
International Space Station Authorization Act of 1995. Mr. Speaker, 
this legislation will firmly establish America's fundamental commitment 
to human spaceflight for decades to come by committing the Congress to 
finish the international Space Station on time and on budget.
  How often in the past 5 years has this House devoted its precious 
time and conducted purposeful debates on the fate of the Space Station, 
only to conclude each time to continue building it? Mr. Speaker, the 
House has consistently voted to support Space Station's development 
every time since it was proposed in 1984--under Republican and 
Democratic Presidents, through four significant redesign efforts, and 
under equally distressing fiscal circumstances.
  In November, the American people voted for change in the way Congress 
does business. Surely the American people want Congress to stop wasting 
money on programs and subsidies they can neither see nor understand. 
But I believe the succession of votes the House has taken over 10 years 
to build the Space Station demonstrates the consternation over building 
it, lays only with some Members of the House, and not with the American 
people.
  This legislation, to commit the Nation to finish what it has started, 
is a new way of doing business. It represents a change in the way 
Congress does business because it says, ``here is our highest space 
priority, and we're going to finish it.'' Passage of a full-program 
authorization for the Space Station will be a breath of fresh air to 
those who have watched in amazement while successive Congresses have 
revisited, revised, and reinvented the Space Station year after year.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people aren't among those who ``know the 
price of everything and the value of nothing.'' Human space exploration 
is an adventure that affects us all in big and small ways. Space is and 
has always been an integral part of our science, our popular culture, 
and our science fiction. Americans are committed to a future for 
themselves and their children that includes space travel. So it is with 
a sense of triumph for that pioneer spirit that I am proud to introduce 
this legislation today, setting our priorities to make certain a future 
in space for this Nation.
  The mechanics of this legislation to fully authorize the Space 
Station are simple. It gives the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration the authority to proceed on its current, baseline Space 
Station development plan, extending from fiscal year 1996 through 
fiscal year 2002--for a total of $13,141,000,000, not to exceed 
$2,121,000,000 in any one fiscal year. The authorization is conditioned 
upon each year's success, meaning that NASA must stay on budget and on 
time for the legislation to remain effective.
  As you can imagine, the best of all worlds would be to fully 
appropriate these funds in a full-program appropriation to mirror this 
legislation. We hope this can be done. This legislation is the first 
step towards the goal of achieving discipline and stability in the 
Space Station program.
  By setting these norms and requirements in law--today we are still 
only working from
 NASA's word to the Congress--and making a contract with NASA for 
completion, I am convinced Congress and the American people will save 
money. The on-again, off-again nature of making space station budgets 
has increased the cost of the space station from $8 billion, as 
proposed in 1984, to $30 billion before the final redesign of the 
project last year. Most of that nearly 4-to-1 cost growth can be 
attributed to redesigns and fiscal stretch-outs called for by actions 
taken by the Congress.

  Today, the space station will cost $13,141,000,000 to complete and 
begin operations, between fiscal years 1996 through 2002. This is a 
significant savings over earlier designs and projections. The redesign 
of 1993 was a redesign aimed at cost reduction, not cost stretch-out, 
while at the same time limiting the annual total to $2.1 billion.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe we have seen enough of no good deed goes 
unpunished. NASA has succeeded in arriving at a design-to-cost space 
station that America can afford and in which that all nations can fully 
participate. Shall we reward NASA's success in this effort by 
redesigning the program again? If I were not convinced that this was 
the best space station attainable under the constraints we have given 
NASA and given ourselves, Mr. Speaker, I would not be able to offer 
this legislation today.
  I would like to stress to my colleagues the compelling need for such 
a full-program authorization at this time.
  First, let us agree there is no cheaper program for building a space 
station than this one. NASA looked in depth at three radically 
different redesign proposals and chose this approach in consultation 
with President Clinton. This is the bare bones space station Congress 
has been searching for, and it has been achieved with minimal 
sacrifices in capability. In fact, I am happy to report that the 
current design will offer more laboratory space and more power than any 
of the previous designs. But this is not a design that can be trimmed 
without radical restructure, and that is why the legislation requires a 
full program authorization. If we are to avoid wasting another nickel, 
a full program authorized to completion is necessary now.
  Second, but also related to cost, is facing the question of human 
space development. Failing to complete this space station within the 
safe operational life of the space shuttle will constrain America to a 
humanless space program. I submit we are always at a critical juncture 
when it comes to keeping people in space. The human space program is 
expensive, always has been, and always will be, until it becomes a 
normal part of everyday life. Yet, if raiding the space station program 
as though it were the cash cow to fund other programs within NASA, or 
elsewhere in the Federal budget, is something Congress wants to do, it 
must be made aware of the consequence: America will abandon flying 
people in space except on Russian space systems. If we raid the space 
station budget, it will cause delays that I fear will extend beyond the 
space shuttle's planned operational life.
  Another situation that requires us to act is the international nature 
of our partnership. We are committed by this design to cooperate in 
depth with the Russian space program, and that means we must be good 
partners not just do-gooders. It is of particular importance to them, 
to Europe, Japan, and to Canada, that Congress show it has chosen to 
move forward--not just for another year, but until the job is done. No 
other government in the solar system undertakes to build something of 
this scope and scale on a year-to-year basis. A full-program 
authorization will help focus the attention of the international 
partnership on those questions that affect the station's operations.
  Finally, and this is profound in the context of today's budget 
battles, President
 Clinton chose the Space Station project alone to be spared from NASA's 
other budget cuts. That's right, Mr. Speaker, the President's tax-cut 
will not be funded by killing off America's future in space. This is 
important news, since the President's budget proposes significant cuts 
to NASA in general, but exempts the Space Station in particular. I 
believe the President has told Congress what I am saying here: Space 
Station is the highest national priority in space today and we must 
finish the job.

  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in both parties that 
now is the time to either make the commitment to finish this important 
project or to abandon it. I believe the weight of the arguments and the 
success of past votes indicates the Space Station will win our full 
support. In the spirit of changing the way we do business and in 
response to President Clinton's leadership in supporting the Space 
Station as an international partnership, I believe that time has come 
to commit Congress to America's future: Space Station.


                          ____________________