The future American president might be the first to pick up a telephone call from the Moon and pick up the line’s voice. To do so, they’ll first need to create a series of corporate place policy decisions. They’ll also need a small success.
The US leader has an enormous role in shaping place scheme during their time in office because of the huge state funding that supports place activities.
Former US presidents have benefited from this authority to strengthen their own product in place and advance the US’s position. The US has benefited from National advocacy, which has helped to secure important space milestones for the country, establish long-lasting global partnerships with civil space agencies abroad, and achieve some other important milestones.
Most presidential candidates, however, do n’t go into great detail about space policy while campaigning, leaving voters in the dark about their plans for the final frontier.
For several candidates, getting into the weeds of their room coverage plans may be more problems than it’s worth. For one, not every president also gets the chance for valuable and memorable place policy decision-making, since space missions can work on decades-long timelines. And in previous elections, those who do display support for storage initiatives have often been criticized by their competitors because of how great the costs are.
But the 2024 election is unique. For storage fans casting their ballots in November, both candidates have impressive records in space plan.
I’m interested in how those records relate to the use of that domain in a proper and green way as a scientist who studies foreign affairs in space. When given a closer look, former US presidents Donald Trump and Kamala Harris have constantly used their positions to prioritize US space leadership, but they have done so with noticeably different approaches and outcomes.
Trump’s place policy report
As president, Trump established a record of significant and lasting place policy decisions, but did so while attracting more attention to his government’s room actions than his predecessors. He frequently accepted funds for contributions and thoughts that were prior to his time in office.
The previous leader was in charge of the US Space Command‘s reorganization and the US Space Force’s re-establishment, as well as the National Space Council. These organizations coordinate governmental agencies working in the room domain, support the development and function of military space technologies, and defend national security satellites in upcoming conflicts.
He also had the most effective record of recent space plan guidelines. These coverage guidelines clarify the US government’s objectives in space, including how it does help and concentrate on the private sector, monitor objects in Earth’s circle, and protect satellites from cyberattacks.
One of his most proud accomplishments of his presidency was his support for the development of the Space Force. However, this campaigning contributed to divided support for the new unit. This fragmentation disintegrated the more prevalent style of republican public assistance for space programming.
Like many leaders, not all of Trump’s views for room were realized. He safely returned the Moon to Mars, which is crucial for NASA’s mission. Given his agency’s funds request, his explicit goal of pilots reaching the moon area by 2024 was hardly practical.
Should he be elected again, the former senator may wish to promote NASA’s Moon programs by expanding investment in the company’s Artemis programme, which houses its celestial initiatives.
He might characterize the initiative as a new space race against China.
Harris in space
The Biden administration has continued to support Trump-era initiatives, resisting the temptation to undo or cancel past proposals. Its space legacy is noticeably less significant.
Harris has set the US space policy priorities and made a global impact as the head of the National Space Council.
Notably, the Trump administration maintained a precedent that the Biden administration upheld that the president could change at any time.
In this role, Harris led the United States ‘ commitment to refrain from testing weapons in space that produce dangerous, long-lasting space debris. This decision is an example for the US for continuing to sustain space operations and acting as a model for the rest of the world’s space community.
Like some Trump administration space policy priorities, not all of Harris ‘ proposals found footing in Washington.
The council’s plan to establish a framework for comprehensively regulating commercial space activities in the US, for example, stalled in Congress.
If these new regulations had been implemented, they would have made sure that future space activities, like private businesses operating on the Moon or taking tourists to and from orbit and back, would have passed strict safety checks.
Harris may choose to continue working to organize oversight over the space industry and establish responsible standards of behavior in space should she be elected.
Alternatively, she could cede the portfolio to her own vice president, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who has virtually no track record on space policy issues.
Stability in major space policy decisions
Voters can anticipate stability in US space policy as a result of this year’s election, despite the two candidates ‘ divisive platforms.
Given their previous leadership, it’s unlikely that either candidate will attempt to significantly alter the long-term missions that the world’s largest government space organizations are currently conducting during the upcoming presidential term. And neither is likely to undercut their predecessors ‘ accomplishments.
Thomas G Roberts is postdoctoral fellow in international affairs, Georgia Institute of Technology
This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.