[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 94 (Friday, May 28, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3936-S3938]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          ENDLESS FRONTIER ACT

  Ms. CANTWELL. Madam President, I wanted to come to the floor and talk 
about one aspect of the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act that we 
haven't had time to fully address out here on the floor, although we 
had some discussion during the amendment process, and that is that the 
underlying bill in S. 1260 also reauthorizes NASA and puts support in 
for the Artemis Program.
  On October 5, 1957, our Nation's relationship with space changed 
forever with the launch of the Soviet satellite Sputnik 1. With a rival 
power's satellite flying overhead, the geostrategic importance of outer 
space was undeniable, and within a year, the Nation had two new science 
agencies: the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, and 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or NASA.
  That launch ignited the American competitive spirit and inspired the 
Nation to rapidly develop its space capabilities.
  Only 12 years later, from that moment, an American was the first man 
to set foot on the Moon, and the race to the Moon set the stage for the 
vibrant, commercial space economy we have today. We like the fact that 
Seattle and the region is now called the ``Silicon Valley of Space.'' I 
know there are many aspects to our country where space is a key 
industry, whether that is in Florida, Alabama, Texas, or other Southern 
States we know, but in the innovation and in the next phases of 
innovation, a lot is happening in the nexus between software and space 
in the Pacific Northwest.
  So we are here again for a great competition about the future of 
space. We must again make the strategic investments needed to win. 
Space is even more geostrategically important today than it was in 
1957. There are more countries in the space race, and our competition 
is more advanced. New NASA Administrator, our former colleague, Senator 
Bill Nelson, testified before the House Appropriations Committee last 
week about China's advanced space missions. The United States landed 
the Perseverance rover on Mars earlier this year and, shortly after, 
China landed their own rover on Mars.
  As Administrator Nelson told the committee, ``they're going to be 
landing humans on the Moon. That should tell us something about our 
need to get off our duff''--spoken like our colleague, as we knew him, 
blunt and to the point.
  I personally believe in the power of competition to spur innovation 
and to push our Nation to get more serious about making investments in 
space that will also catalyze economic growth. I do believe we should 
rise to the occasion.
  That is why we are trying to be very specific in an innovation and 
competition bill about what it is going to take to fund the Artemis 
Program. That means recommitting to the ambitious human space 
exploration goals like returning Americans to the Moon and sending our 
astronauts to Mars in partnership with commercial and international 
partners. These are the candidates here for that Artemis mission. They 
are like our new colleague, Commander Kelly, who are preparing--and it 
takes years to prepare--for this mission. I want to give them the 
certainty that we are going to make the right investments.

  That means taking a hard look at whether we are doing enough to 
protect the intellectual property essential to our leadership in space. 
We should make sure that where the entrepreneurs for these are 
concerned, our IP and intellectual property won't be stolen by other 
countries and, of course, it means providing NASA for the needs that 
they have to carry out the human exploration, science, and space 
technology missions.
  We can't afford to lose momentum within the Artemis Program. The 
Chinese, as I mentioned, are making rapid progress on a heavy-lift 
rocket with its ambitious exploration missions. We, too, I believe, 
should be doing all we can to understand and harness the power of this 
market and to make sure that Congress does its proper oversight role.
  I recognize that my colleagues and I may have a disagreement about 
the role of the commercial sector in space. It has been a long time 
since Congress made this decision, but I certainly respect my 
colleagues' ability and interest in disputing here.
  Commercial programs can deliver lower prices and allow industry to 
bring about innovation and also help catalyze other ideas. That is why 
it has been NASA policy, since 1980, to encourage the fullest 
commercial use of space. That is when we really took off on this 
concept.
  I do understand that some probably have an idea that NASA should 
still control all of this IP and be in a position of funding all of 
this ourselves, but I think our policy to move toward the 
commercialization of space has given us some benefits.
  A bill focused on competition and research and development cannot 
leave NASA out of the conversation. That is why Ranking Member Wicker 
and I did bipartisan legislation to authorize NASA in the Endless 
Frontier Act as it came out of committee.
  The exploration and science work NASA carries out is important in and 
of itself, but their capacity to spin off additional inventions and 
other benefits to us also return investment.

[[Page S3937]]

  NASA has generated more than 2,000 spinoff technologies since 1976 
and, on average, these tech transfers from NASA generate generally $1 
million per year for each spinoff enterprise.
  The gear that keeps our firefighters safe was originally developed as 
part of the space program as NASA developed astronaut clothing and 
gear. LASIK eye surgery, cochlear implants to improve hearing, portable 
water filtration, cell phone cameras, and even memory foam all came out 
of NASA programs.
  So now let's talk about this next project; that is, the Artemis 
project that is, obviously, an indication that we plan to send some 
women to the surface of the Moon. This time, under NASA's Artemis 
Program, when we return to the Moon, it will be a woman who will take 
the first step. These are two candidates from this mission who, I am 
proud to say, are from the State of Washington and, hopefully, will be 
competing for one of those spots.
  Going to the Moon will allow us to develop the assets we need to go 
to Mars and the assets to reduce the risk of what a crewed Martian 
mission might look like. So this includes developing the most powerful 
rocket ever built, the Space Launch System with its Enhanced Upper 
Stage. That rocket will be able to carry 38 tons of crew and cargo, 
which NASA needs to enable a sustainable presence on or around the 
Moon.
  NASA will develop an orbiting outpost, like the Gateway, which will 
be like an International Space Station for the Moon that can serve as a 
way station for what we need to do to get our astronauts to and from 
and material to and from the way station, similar to what we would do 
with Mars. So nuclear power sources for surface operations and human 
landing systems--all of these things are part of the critical 
legislation.
  We will demonstrate the ability to build and live in a habitat on the 
surface of another planet. That is what the Artemis project is all 
about. The Space Launch System and its capabilities will be 
complemented by commercial rocket launch science experiments essential 
to our understanding of how to operate on the Moon and components of 
NASA that are building for things on and around the Moon.
  Getting to the Moon will also open up new opportunities for more 
commercial space industry, and once we set up a camp on the Moon, our 
astronauts will demonstrate the technology needed to extract resources 
like fuel, water, oxygen, and opening up new economic opportunities.
  The University of Washington has a lab devoted to technologies for 
extracting water from the Martian atmosphere, and they are ready to do 
more. And in 2020, NASA challenged the commercial sector to conduct a 
mission that would set the precedent for mining lunar resources
  Our commercial space industry is a critical partner to the Artemis 
Program. The commercial sector brings their best ideas and the best 
technology to the table for NASA's programs. Commercial capabilities 
enable the missions at lower cost with greater capabilities than could 
have been dreamed of during the Apollo era.
  However, NASA should be held accountable for how it manages these 
commercial programs. President Trump, in his budget, requested $3.4 
billion for the lander system. In fact, I think the Vice President at 
the time, Mike Pence, was an enthusiastic supporter of the Artemis 
Program and constantly evangelized our need for investment.
  The Agency has made it clear they need $10 billion for the human 
lander system over the next several years. This program investment, I 
believe, is critical to the mission, but it is also critical that it 
follows NASA's best practices.
  One of the lessons learned from the assembly of the International 
Space Station is the importance of having multiple space transportation 
providers. NASA carried out that best practice in programs that 
developed the commercial space system that carried cargo and crew to 
the International Space Station.
  The American taxpayers invest too much in these space programs not to 
apply these lessons about the importance of resiliency and redundancy. 
The same lesson should be applied to the programs developed here as we 
approach this new project to land people back on the Moon.
  These are complex systems with multiple components that need to work 
together to get astronauts down to the lunar surface and back safely. 
Building in resiliency and redundancy increases NASA's chances of 
successfully landing humans on the Moon and bringing them home safely.
  The Commercial Cargo Program is a perfect example where building in 
resiliency and redundancy through competition paid off. The program was 
created to transport cargo like supplies for astronauts and science 
missions to the International Space Station. During that program, one 
company's rocket blew up on the way to the International Space Station 
and had to be removed from service for a whole year. But because the 
program built in resiliency and redundancy, the Nation was able to 
continue to supply the station with the supplies that it needed.
  When the second commercial company suffered a launch failure months 
later, the first company stepped back in. The importance of maintaining 
competition within NASA programs to protect our investments and 
maximize our chances of mission success were clearly there, and we were 
able to keep going.
  As a former NASA official put it, ``Technical redundancy and market 
competition [are] central to the principle of commercial space 
contracting. Any one system would just leave us with the 
vulnerabilities that had plagued the space shuttle program.''
  And we all know the complexities and challenges and the disaster that 
could and did happen there.
  This is our opportunity now to invest, as we are making this big 
decision about America's competition and our innovation. Nothing could 
be a greater symbol than our return to the Moon and our exploration of 
Mars and the competition we face than galvanizing Americans in support 
of this, just as we did in the sixties. This is our opportunity to 
invest in American space capabilities and leadership for decades into 
the future.
  We are going to make sure we get this right. We are going to make 
sure we protect the taxpayer investment. We are going to make sure we 
have redundancy now. I think this underlying bill helps us by 
clarifying to NASA what we expect out of the Artemis Program and what 
we need to do to make sure that NASA follows best practices in its 
management program.
  Returning Americans to the Moon and landing people on Mars will do 
wonders, and certainly I am excited about the iconic nature of a woman 
being the first to return for us to the Moon and all the things that 
will help us in educating women in the areas of science, technology, 
engineering, and math.
  NASA does great work promoting these missions and getting young 
people interested in the STEM field, and it can inspire a whole 
generation of women to take up the sciences and to be involved. We saw 
this during the Apollo era. Many scientific and technical professionals 
went into their fields because they got excited by watching the Apollo 
missions.
  So as we stare down the potential for millions and millions of 
unfilled STEM jobs for the future, I think this is the kind of 
inspiration that can be quite helpful to us.
  Also, from Earth science, to solar science, to astrophysics, the 
scientific work of NASA helps us understand our universe. NASA's 
climate work is particularly impactful. Their data on sea level rise 
and carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are critical to 
understanding the ability to fight climate change, and that is why the 
Earth sciences open up so much data for us that we want to make sure we 
are moving forward with this NASA authorization.
  It will require NASA to make its Earth science data as interactive, 
interoperable, and accessible as feasible to academics and industry so 
that they can utilize this information more usefully. I actually think 
this is a very exciting element of the program and progress that NASA 
is making. It is a no-brainer that it would allow us to squeeze more 
value out of the incredible work that NASA already does.
  We also can't forget the first ``A'' in ``NASA'': aeronautics. The 
aviation industry is 5.2 percent of our GDP and

[[Page S3938]]

supports over 10 million jobs. Keeping that industry competitive, 
especially as the Nation comes out of the COVID pandemic, and keeping 
us on track with meeting our international emissions standards is 
critical.
  NASA's experimental work developing X-planes, in partnership with 
industry, drives major innovations in aeronautics. Their current work 
is focused on reducing the noise and emissions of aircraft, developing 
electronic propulsion, and demonstrating supersonic aircraft that could 
one day fly over land, among other projects.
  Each of these are not incremental changes; they are fundamental 
changes. I hope that we will move forward on this legislation.
  This legislation also requires NASA to continue to collaborate with 
industry to develop next-generation materials like composites. 
Composites, lightweight material, are so important, I guarantee you, in 
the race for aviation, advanced composite manufacturing, and whoever 
conquers this field best will be the leaders in aviation manufacturing.
  The Agency's Advanced Composites Project was a great success in 
seeking to reduce the time needed to develop and certify new 
composites. It would be a loss to the Nation if the Agency were to lose 
momentum on this important work.
  So, as the Presiding Officer can see, I believe this NASA provision 
that is in the underlying legislation is critical.
  The Senate passed this NASA authorization last Congress, only to have 
it fail to be taken up in the House. It is time that we get this 
legislation through the entire Congress, that we make this Artemis 
mission a true priority, with true committed resources, to help us be 
successful and to be proud sometime in the near future to see that 
woman standing on the face of the Moon.
  I thank the President.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________