House Budget Proposal Includes The Creation Of The United States Space Corps.

from the knee-deep-in-the-debt dept

Tue, Jul 11th 2017 6:41pm — Timothy Geigner

There has been much in the way of focus on all the different ways Congress has devised to fight with itself as of recent, with most of that revolving around stupid partisan bickering and political posturing. Still, there are real proposals on the table, and currently the 2018 defense budget is one of them. We've already talked about some recent changes in DoD recruitment strategies that seek to get with the times, as it were. But where those changes were made to stave off dwindling rosters of soldiers at CYBERCOM, the House proposal for 2018 includes the creation of a brand new military branch.

Don't get your hopes up too high about becoming a space marine quite yet. But if the House of Representatives' version of the 2018 defense budget goes through, you may soon be able to enlist in the US Space Corps.

The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) has breathed new life into those old plans by including a provision in the House version of the 2018 US defense budget that would create a separate military service dedicated to the cause of space as a warfare domain: the US Space Corps. It would also create a separate joint command, the US Space Command, breaking the role out of the US Strategic Command much in the way that was done with the US Cyber Command.

The biggest surprise in all of this might well be that it took this long, actually. Cyber Command's battleground is mere decades old, whereas we have been exploring space for more than half a century. Still, there is something unnerving about formalizing Earth's place at the cosmic table as a potential war theater. That said, the proposal does enjoy the rare consensus of bi-partisan support and it's not difficult to understand why. More than ever, we rely on assets outside of our immediate atmosphere to power all sorts of things key to our national security and power. The branch that currently oversees space defense and strategy, the Air Force, is no longer seen as capable of handling the job.

There’s been nothing shortsighted about this. We started working on it vigorously in September, and we’ve had countless meetings with a number of experts who have advised us as to how this should be construed. GAO has done three studies on this, all of which tell us that you cannot maintain the current organizational construct of the Air Force and solve the acquisition problems and the operational problems that we have. The Air Force is like any other bureaucracy. They don’t want to change.

At some level, this was inevitable. We are humans and, where we go, we fight. So don your helmets and fire up that chainsaw, future space marines, because the next battleground may be the inky blackness of the void. If so, it seems the House of Representatives, at least, wants to be prepared for it.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: budget, space, space corp., us government

44 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Jul 2017 @ 5:21pm

To win what?
So we won the cold war by making it too expensive for non capitalist societies to continue to compete. Now we are going to militarize space with what as a goal? Being able to kill countries where our weapons are out of range of the 'enemy', or a second phase of the cold war win, out spend em, capitalist or not. And with our tax dollars in the boondoggle know as DoD Procurement.

How much is currently spent on weapons systems that don't work, and how much will be spent on systems that will fail in this endeavor?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hugh Jasohl (profile), 11 Jul 2017 @ 7:29pm
  
  Re: To win what?
  China is advancing in space in a big way. They have enough launches planned over the next 18 months to militarize space if they wanted too and war spending is always on a capable of doing basis, not a verified as doing basis.
  
  We aren't saying much in the news about it, but Russia has been replaced by China as the main cold war threat.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Atkray (profile), 11 Jul 2017 @ 7:50pm
    
    Re: Re: To win what?
    To win what?
    
    You missed this video that was leaked of their plans.
    
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3LbxDZRgA4
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2017 @ 10:40pm
    
    Re: Re: To win what?
    China is the world's best hope against the emerging US threat.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 9:22am
      
      Re: Re: Re: To win what?
      Sadly had to mark that as both funny AND insightful.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:15am
    
    Re: Re: To win what?
    Cold war, space war, war against China, war against Russia, war against Islam and the Muslims, war against immigrants, you american idiots know no other word than war?
    
    There is no cold war, not with Russia not with China, they are both fully capitalist nations.
    
    "China is advancing in space"
    
    So? That means America should run for military action huh? Stupidity everywhere.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 9:48am
  
  Re: To win what?
  
  Now we are going to militarize space with what as a goal? ... with our tax dollars in the boondoggle know as DoD Procurement.
  
  Maybe getting the dollars is the goal.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:19am
    
    Re: Re: To win what?
    That is exactly the point, get more dollars from tax payers to stupid "defense" budgets, to protect american sheeple from those evil russians, chinese, muslism, immigrants, and now aliens. Poor american people, live always scared of an enemy, always scared of a threat created bu their own government and propaganda machines, just to send more dollars to the defense and military contractors, all while the average wage has remained stagnant for the last 40-50 years, while income inequality keeps breaking record levels, while millions live on food stamps and are considered poor.
    
    More tax payer dollars for defense while the rest of the population is expected to set into "Austherity" mode, because there is no money.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 11 Jul 2017 @ 7:35pm

Head start
Might as well enlist. Everyone says I'm a space cadet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:21am
  
  Re: Head start
  They meant that in a derogative way.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2017 @ 8:06pm

The Russians already have the Russian Space Forces, pretty similar to this proposal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:22am
  
  Re:
  Oh I see, so America has to follow suit huh? What you just said is very stupid.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2017 @ 9:03pm

How to reduce the bureaucracy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:22am
  
  Re: How to reduce the bureaucracy?
  Reduce corruption.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Christenson, 11 Jul 2017 @ 9:08pm

How to reduce the bureaucracy?
"..all of which tell us that you cannot maintain the current organizational construct of the Air Force and solve the acquisition problems and the operational problems that we have. The Air Force is like any other bureaucracy. They don’t want to change."

So how do you shed the useless Air Force bureaucracy? Seems creating a "space command" does nothing to trim this waste.

Not that we don't have a looming and thorny problem of orbiting debris....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Jul 2017 @ 10:43pm
  
  Re: How to reduce the bureaucracy?
  I came to say that arguably the Air Force is the least suited to command a Space Corps. The Air Force mainly wants to fly fast fighter jets.
  
  Arguably the Navy is more suited to command a Space Corps. Space stations would be more analogous to ships at sea than fighter jets and the Navy has decades of experience maintaining hundreds of ships at sea for months at a time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Seegras (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 12:12am
    
    Re: Re: How to reduce the bureaucracy?
    Absolutely, the Air Force is clearly unsuited.
    
    Even their ranks are ridiculous. It's clear you can't have a space vessel commanded by something like a "major" or "colonel", This has to be a "commander" or a "captain" or course.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Jason, 12 Jul 2017 @ 5:36am
      
      Re: Re: Re: How to reduce the bureaucracy?
      Stargate Command managed it well enough. :)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:24am
  
  Re: How to reduce the bureaucracy?
  On the contrary, it will just create another bureaucracy. Another dollar swallowing bureaucracy with little results. I mean if you call the win on Mosul or the increasing income inequality a result then you have been brainwashed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seegras (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 12:50am

Blame Nixon
Well, you had Nixon to gut the space program to wage war instead. NASAs budget was cut from 4% to 0.4%. And none of the later presidents, including the one in power now, have reinstated it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Roger Strong (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 6:06am
  
  Re: Blame Nixon
  Actually the big budget cuts - and the cancellation of the second production run of Saturn Vs - came before Nixon.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 1:31am

What I wonder about is how we can go about doing this without violating the treaty that forbids the militarization of space.

Also, it is great to see that the magnificent Timothy Geigner has an interest in Warhammer, you sir, have easily achieved the rather lowly position of my favorite writer on this site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dirkmaster (profile), 13 Jul 2017 @ 8:07am
  
  Re:
  This is exactly what I was wondering. Isn't there a treaty from the 60's that directly forbids this kind of thing?
  
  But a quick Google search led me (of course) to Wikipedia and
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty
  
  So, evidently not.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:26am
  
  Re:
  No problem, your mighty american government will simply ignore the law and impose their will by force. /sarcasm
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ninja (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 4:43am

If I had to elect one most wasteful way of spending money this would be among the finalists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Wendy Cockcroft, 13 Jul 2017 @ 5:15am
  
  Re:
  Yes, but space. Spaaaaacccccce!
  
  Jokes aside, the space race has resulted in handy inventions we use every day, e.g. velcro, so it's not completely wasteful. I must agree that it is a massive money suck probably best left to the market since we've got so many problems here on Earth to be dealing with.
  
  It's a hell of a distraction, though.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:27am
  
  Re:
  Of course, because there is no money to spend!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheResidentSkeptic (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 5:54am

Guess Again
This is just creating an un-classified branch so we quit looking for the classified ones...

If you really think this hasn't existed from day one, you just don't understand the "Black Budget" and what it pays for.

Tell me again - what is the X37B used for?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 5:56am

Shouldn't they call it Starfleet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- E., 12 Jul 2017 @ 8:21am
  
  Re:
  Word.
  
  But isn't NASA kind of similar to this? Wouldn't it be rather redundant?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:29am
  
  Re:
  Nah, it is America we talking here, give it more bling more flash more explosions and more of everything... Universal Government or some shit like that would be more suitable to America's "blinginess".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 6:09am

It's called a chainsword but nice reference. Future looks grim maybe you should rebrand to TechDire...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Neverless, 12 Jul 2017 @ 9:28am
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 12th, 2017 @ 6:09am
  The "department" title is a reference to one of the levels of the classic Doom game, Knee Deep In The Dead, which also features chainsaws along with other weapons, no Warhammers required.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 7:06am

I wanna join up. I think I got what it takes to be a Citizen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JoeCool (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 8:28am
  
  Re:
  Just think, you'll finally get to vote. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 9:48am
    
    Re: Re:
    When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force my friends is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Wendy Cockcroft, 13 Jul 2017 @ 2:14am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      LOL! Anarchy doesn't scale, matey.
      
      Besides, why should the government have a monopoly on force? I want to be able to exercise political authority too.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 9:49am
  
  Re:
  This is for all you new people. I have only one rule. Everybody fights, no one quits. If you don't do your job, I'll kill you myself! Welcome to the Roughnecks!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2017 @ 2:36am
    
    Re: Re:
    Someone's got a hard-on for Robert A. Heinlein.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Wendy Cockcroft, 13 Jul 2017 @ 5:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      This is Techdirt. We all do. ;p
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2017 @ 10:37am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      The satire was exquisite.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2017 @ 11:30am
  
  Re:
  Clearly.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Roger Strong (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 10:24pm

Other countries are responding accordingly.

Canada's Governor General represents the Queen as Canada's head of state, and holds the title of Commander-in-Chief of the Canadian Forces.

Today the Queen appointed a new Governor General of Canada. One who has been to the International Space Station. Twice.

So now the Queen is appointing military leaders, viceregal representatives to her colonies and territories, who have astronaut experience. I sense a new round of expansionist imperialism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Wendy Cockcroft, 13 Jul 2017 @ 2:15am
  
  Re:
  [Sad but True]
  
  They'll all be poncing about in uniforms with red jackets and big hats with feathers on.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]