[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8503-8504]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  FUNDING THE STRATOSPHERIC OBSERVATORY FOR INFRARED ASTRONOMY PROGRAM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Knight) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank the House 
Appropriations Committee for fully funding the Stratospheric 
Observatory for Infrared Astronomy, SOFIA, program.
  The SOFIA program is something that is stationed in my district. It 
is a 747 airplane with a 100-inch telescope in the back. Some people 
ask why we would need this or why this is something that NASA is so 
excited about. It is because we have certain programs that are in the 
atmosphere, and on the ground today, many of them have restrictions, 
but SOFIA doesn't. SOFIA does things that other telescopes just can't 
do.
  First, it flies at 40,000 feet, so it gets above the water vapor. 
That is something that we just can't do from the ground. We can't do 
that type of science, those observations--we just can't do it--yet 
SOFIA does something that many other telescopes can't do.
  It does something that the Hubble can't do. It does something that 
our beloved James Webb Space Telescope, which is going to be launched 
in the next couple of years, cannot do. It

[[Page 8504]]

lands, and we can upgrade it. If there is something new in 2015, we can 
put it on SOFIA. SOFIA can take off. We can do our projects, and we can 
do our experiments. It can land. If we have something new in 2016, we 
can do the same thing and so on and so forth.
  For the next 20 years, we will be flying SOFIA if this Congress 
continues to fund it. Last year, SOFIA was on the chopping block, and 
without the good leadership of our majority leader, it might have gone 
away.
  What I wanted to bring to everyone's attention is, if we are going to 
fund NASA, if we are going to fund projects for our new generation, if 
we are going to explore, if we are going to do all of the things that 
make America great and that make America the exploration country that 
we have been for the last 100-plus years, then we have to invest a 
little bit.
  When the administration threatened to shut down SOFIA in fiscal year 
2015, Congress showed strong support to make sure that SOFIA would 
continue; but, as we move forward, we understand what these types of 
projects bring.
  As I look into the crowd, I see an awful lot of young folks who have 
either visited Washington, D.C., or they are on a tour, or they are 
doing something. That is what SOFIA brings. Every year, we put fifth 
and sixth and seventh grade teachers in SOFIA for a 9- or 10-hour 
mission.
  They get to work with NASA. They get to work with scientists from 
America and from Germany because this is a joint project, and they get 
to see what projects and what experiments NASA is doing. They also get 
to work with NASA hand in hand.
  They get to bring that back to the classroom, and they get to teach 
their fifth through seventh grade students about astronomy, about 
learning, about new planets, about new stars, about dying stars, about 
new solar systems. They take that at a practical level not just what is 
in the book, but what they learn, what they see, and what they do with 
NASA itself.
  Also, I greatly appreciate the language that the committee included 
in the report accompanying the fiscal year 2016 Commerce, Justice, 
Science Appropriations bill, which reaffirms our support for SOFIA and 
rejects NASA's plan to conduct a senior review of the mission at such a 
premature stage.
  If we are going to look at what SOFIA and other projects from NASA 
do, we have to allow them to bring us some real data. That data takes 
time. If we are going to do that on a 1- or 2-year status and then, 
maybe, cancel a project, then all of the money that we have injected 
into this project will be for naught.
  Given that SOFIA achieved full operating status just this last year, 
in 2014, it has been designed for a lifespan of up to, like I said, 20 
years. A senior review should not be at a 2-year stand, but it should 
go to a 5- or an 8-year stand so that we can collect the data and make 
sure that this program is worth the money the taxpayers spend on it.
  I would like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
because they have supported this project just like they have supported 
many projects for NASA and for our experiment community.
  Without the support from both sides of the aisle, it is really going 
to be difficult for America to continue to be the leader in space 
exploration and exploration abroad.

                          ____________________