The bill allocates $85 million to move the shuttle. For some reason Senator Cornyn doesn't mention that number in his press releases. The relevant text:
> (F) $85,000,000 shall be obligated to carry out subsection (b), of which not less than $5,000,000 shall be obligated for the transportation of the space vehicle described in that subsection, with the remainder transferred not later than the date that is 18 months after the date of the enactment of this section to the entity designated under that subsection, for the purpose of construction of a facility to house the space vehicle referred to in that subsection.
Also, the Air and Space Museum is free and Space Center Houston (the new location) charges $30 per person.
Animats · 9m ago
Strangely, according to its Congressional proponents, the language in the bill says "to transfer a space vehicle involved in the Commercial Crew Program". That would not be a Shuttle. That's a Space-X Dragon, or one of the boosters.
The remaining Shuttles were delivered by carrying them atop NASA's Shuttle Carrier, a Boeing 747 rigged for that, and landing it at a nearby airport.
Those craft were retired years ago. Unclear how to move the thing without cutting it apart.
derbOac · 4m ago
Also, no one is providing the rest of the "message sent to Congress" in which "the organization said it would be 'unprecedented' for the federal government to remove an object from its collection and send it somewhere else."
There's nothing about noting that something is "unprecedented" that counts as lobbying or opposition per se. It could be "unprecedented" in a good way; the organization might have also just been answering a question or asking for clarification -- which seems reasonable given that the law specifies something involved in the Commercial Crew Program, not the shuttle.
Mathnerd314 · 2m ago
All I can find on the Smithsonian is that they did press interviews, where various staff expressed opposition, and also they sent some report to Congress. The press interviews are, pretty naturally, public speeches, and it could also be argued they are unrelated to lobbying. The report, that's also the normal course of their duties, it would be a pretty catch-22 situation if a report was considered lobbying. Seems like blustering on the part of the politicians, they write dumb letters all the time for PR purposes.
> (F) $85,000,000 shall be obligated to carry out subsection (b), of which not less than $5,000,000 shall be obligated for the transportation of the space vehicle described in that subsection, with the remainder transferred not later than the date that is 18 months after the date of the enactment of this section to the entity designated under that subsection, for the purpose of construction of a facility to house the space vehicle referred to in that subsection.
Also, the Air and Space Museum is free and Space Center Houston (the new location) charges $30 per person.
The remaining Shuttles were delivered by carrying them atop NASA's Shuttle Carrier, a Boeing 747 rigged for that, and landing it at a nearby airport. Those craft were retired years ago. Unclear how to move the thing without cutting it apart.
There's nothing about noting that something is "unprecedented" that counts as lobbying or opposition per se. It could be "unprecedented" in a good way; the organization might have also just been answering a question or asking for clarification -- which seems reasonable given that the law specifies something involved in the Commercial Crew Program, not the shuttle.
Space shuttle situation is a disaster though.