No products in the cart.
Billionaire tech entrepreneur Jared Isaacman returned to Capitol Hill Wednesday for his second affirmation listening to for the function of NASA administrator. Members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation grilled him with questions on a leaked doc outlining his controversial imaginative and prescient for the company.
The manifesto, titled Project Athena, got here up repeatedly in the course of the 10 a.m. ET hearing. Senators raised issues about strains within the doc that recommend to them that Isaacman would reevaluate NASA’s plan for a sustained lunar presence, outsource information assortment to personal corporations, and weaken the company’s local weather science capabilities.
For his half, Isaacman largely downplayed their fears, casting them as misinterpretations of Challenge Athena’s language and its supposed function.
“I do stand behind every thing within the doc, regardless that it was written seven months in the past,” Isaacman mentioned earlier than the committee. “I believe it was directionally right, in keeping with prior testimony and my interactions with numerous senators.”
What’s Challenge Athena?
President Trump initially nominated Isaacman to steer NASA at first of his time period. Throughout Wednesday’s listening to, Isaacman testified that he started drafting Challenge Athena at the moment and continued to replace the doc based mostly on his interactions with NASA management and numerous senators.
He characterised Challenge Athena as “concepts” and “ideas” on the path of the company. “It was at all times one thing that was meant to be refined with precise information ought to I’ve been confirmed,” he mentioned.
Isaacman went via his first affirmation listening to in April, however Trump all of a sudden withdrew his nomination in Might, citing issues about his Democratic marketing campaign contributions and ties to SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who was publicly feuding with Trump on the time. In July, the president instated Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy as performing NASA administrator.
Round that point, Isaacman and his staff edited the Athena papers all the way down to 62 pages and gave them to Duffy and his chief of workers, Pete Meachum, sources advised Ars Technica and Politico. In early November, this edited model was leaked to house lobbyists on Capitol Hill and, in the end, the press.
The leak made headlines as a number of information retailers—together with Ars and Politico—obtained copies of the doc and revealed the sweeping adjustments it reportedly outlines. Gizmodo has not independently verified these particulars, however senators referenced them a number of instances throughout Wednesday’s listening to.
Isaacman doubles down
Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) opened questioning on Challenge Athena, specializing in what he noticed as a disconnect between Isaacman’s earlier assurance that he had no preliminary plans to cancel NASA packages and Athena’s name to reevaluate NASA’s sustained lunar-presence structure.
The Athena doc reportedly recommends canceling the Gateway lunar house station and NASA’s megarocket, the Area Launch System (SLS)—each half of the present structure for NASA’s Artemis program—after two extra missions.
In response to Kim, Isaacman defined that whereas strains from the 62-page doc might be taken out of context, he acknowledges the crucial of returning American astronauts to the lunar floor and establishing the infrastructure for a lunar base. He additionally emphasised the necessity for a research-backed plan to realize these objectives.
Kim additionally requested if Isaacman stands by a line from the doc that recommends taking NASA “out of the taxpayer-funded local weather science enterprise” and “leaving it for academia to find out.”
“If it’s not 10 pages, it might be 20 pages of the 62 that particularly name for analysis requests from throughout the affiliate directors, the varied material specialists, to tell a definitive plan,” Isaacman responded. “That’s all through the whole doc.”
Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) later said that Challenge Athena “actually banks on the decimation of [NASA’s] scientific capabilities.”
“Amongst different issues, this doc requires NASA to cease accumulating its personal information and as an alternative arrange a taxpayer-funded subscription service from personal corporations for his or her merchandise—corporations that can set their very own worth for information that NASA must perform on an ongoing foundation,” Markey mentioned.
Isaacman argued that the senator’s interpretation of this part was utterly incorrect. “What that draft doc contemplated was working with business corporations for sure forms of Earth statement information,” he defined, including that corporations resembling Planet Labs and BlackSky might be able to ship Earth statement and local weather science information at a decrease price.
Isaacman’s responses didn’t seem to assuage the senators’ issues. He additionally confronted robust strains of questioning about potential conflicts of curiosity with Elon Musk and SpaceX, in addition to latest donations to pro-Trump political motion committees. Whether or not a Senate majority will be capable of overlook these points and make sure Isaacman stays to be seen.
