00:00Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator Kim. Yeah, thank you Chair. Mr.
00:06Isaacman, I'd just like to start with you. I guess I just wanted a little more
00:09clarity about are you committed to having a permanent presence on the moon?
00:16Senator, I think the biggest thing is we need to get back there. It's been taking
00:21a very long time and the American taxpayers have invested an awful lot. I agree
00:25with you on that front. I think we can take that for granted between me and you.
00:28But I guess I want to get a sense because you know the chairman laid this out
00:32actually and then the poster that he had wasn't just about getting back to the
00:35moon but it was about sustaining a presence on the moon and I just feel
00:39like I don't have a good understanding of what your actual position is right now
00:43on that. Well I think Senator, again, the first step to me is to return to the moon
00:48and determine its economic, its scientific, and its national security value for
00:53remaining there. I saw that in your statement and I guess again I was
00:58confused because in your response to the chairman you were talking about how
01:01you know Helium-3 this is something that could very well shift the balance of
01:04power within the you know here on earth. What else are you looking at? Like what
01:10else is in your mind right now beyond Helium-3 and the impacts there when
01:14you're talking about scientific, economic, and national security? Well Senator that's
01:18what I mean that's what we need to get there to find out. You know all the best
01:21science fiction movies out there have something like Helium-3 as the
01:25economic justification for an enduring presence not just on the moon but for
01:30out throughout you know space exploration. So I guess you know kind of as we've
01:34been talking about this you know moon Mars two priorities you were much more
01:38definitive about saying we need to get to Mars. So I guess I just want to ask you
01:42that same question what are the scientific economic and national security
01:46priorities that you see more clearly when it comes to going to Mars right now
01:50than in terms of having a permanent presence on the moon? Well Senator to be
01:54clear I certainly hope in the future that we have lots of space stations, a
01:58full lunar outpost, a Mars outpost, and we're pushing even beyond that. I'm just
02:02saying we need to get back to the moon. We need to figure out why we need to be
02:06there and I certainly hope there is a reason. Why do we need to be, like what I'm
02:09trying to get a sense of you seem much more definitive about saying we need to
02:12get to Mars and putting resources towards that effort. What are the specific economic,
02:18scientific, and national security interests you see there? Because I get a
02:22sense that you have some greater clarity there than you do when it comes to the
02:25moon. Well I would actually hope you're getting a sincere answer from me
02:30that we should be doing both and the other things. Now Mars... You think we can do
02:34both moon and the Mars on the current NASA budget? I sure hope so. NASA is it was
02:39built to do the near impossible and have a thriving space economy in low Earth
02:43orbit and continue extraordinary science missions to kind of unlock the
02:47secrets of the universe, sir. Well I guess I just want to reinforce what the
02:51chairman said. I mean I think we need to have much more clarity in how we're
02:54talking about what it is our objectives when it comes to the moon. As mentioned
02:58you we have a lot more clarity about what China's objectives are and I hope that
03:02that is something that you can clarify quickly if you are confirmed. When it comes
03:06to the International Space Station, what is your perceived timeline there in
03:10terms of when we should be starting to bring that down? Well Senator, first of all I
03:16I don't know of any reason why we should be bringing it down before what's
03:19currently scheduled. What I do think we need to do is maximize its remaining life,
03:23get as much of the high potential science and research to the station, figure out
03:28what that space economy is, so when the day does come to hand it off to the
03:31commercial LEO destinations they are in a financially you know self-sustaining
03:35type way. And you talked about that in terms of the space economy. In terms of what
03:39should succeed the International Space Station, do you believe that that should be
03:43commercial only or do you see prospects of the US government or a government run
03:48space station to succeed the International Space Station? Well right now
03:52Senator if we don't figure out the space economy whether it's commercially
03:55operated or not it's going to be entirely financially sustained by the
03:59government. So do you but I guess I'm asking what is your do you have a
04:03preference in terms of you see a sense of need for a government run I guess I'm
04:09just trying to ask you what is it that NASA can do that commercial efforts can't
04:14do? Well that's it I mean that's a fantastic question Senator I mean the
04:18line should be drawn again at in terms of NASA undertaking the near impossible
04:22challenges that again no company organization or agency anywhere in the
04:27world would be able to would be able to undertake it. I gave a very good example I
04:31think in my opening remarks on nuclear propulsion that's something that no
04:34company would ever embark upon there is no obvious economic return there's
04:39regulatory challenges that's exactly the kind of thing that NASA should be
04:42concentrating its resources on. Well I say I just want to say here and I know I'm
04:46running out of time I'm really hard to see I think we're all very proud of the
04:51astronauts that are here in this room but I think I could speak for them and
04:55say look we also recognize the importance of the civil servants and playing
05:00so many different roles for the safety and the innovation that's out there as I
05:03expressed to you I am concerned about how this administration has approached what
05:08I believe are indiscriminate cuts at different and firings at different
05:12departments and agencies and if you're confirmed I hope that you stand up
05:15against indiscriminate cuts I think we're all very recognizing that they're
05:19places for efficiencies and elsewhere but we need to make sure that we're
05:22protecting the expertise that's out there
Comments