Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been diagnosed with a brain tumor. As chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), he has a profound influence on national security space programs.  He had already delayed his return to Washington to recover from a medical procedure over the weekend to remove a blood clot. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is substituting for him at SASC hearings this week.

As chairman of SASC, McCain is in charge of drafting the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that sets policy and recommends funding for the Department of Defense (DOD). SASC also recommends to the Senate whether to approve or disapprove presidential nominees for civilian and military DOD positions including those who oversee DOD space programs and operations such as the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Air Force, Air Force Chief of Staff, Commander of U.S. Strategic Command and Commander of Air Force Space Command. It is difficult to overstate his influence on the national security space sector.

Senator John McCain.  Photo credit:  McCain website.

McCain is a harsh critic of Russia and in recent years has become particularly well known in the space community for his opposition to the use of Russia’s RD-180 engines for the United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Atlas V rocket.  Initially he tried to limit their use for national security launches by prohibiting additional engine purchases and insisting on development of a U.S. launch vehicle using U.S. engines by 2019.  He finally relented on the timeline last year, agreeing to push it out to 2022 as requested by the Air Force.  Just last month during debate over a Russia sanctions bill, however, he broadened his efforts to limit the use of any Russian rocket engines for civil or commercial launches, too.  His amendment failed.

SASC already has completed markup of the FY2018 NDAA.  It is awaiting floor action in the Senate.  The House version passed last week.  Once the Senate passes its bill, a compromise will have to be negotiated, a process in which the chairmen of the two Armed Services committees play a crucial role.  Both bills direct DOD to reorganize how it deals with space programs, but the two approaches are dramatically different.  The issue will be one of the many difficult topics they will have to thrash out. SASC wants a new DOD Chief Information Warfare Officer with broad authority over space programs. The House wants a Space Corps within the Air Force and a U.S. Space Command as a subunit of U.S. Strategic Command.

At McCain’s request, the Mayo Clinic, which is treating him, released a statement explaining that “tissue pathology revealed that a primary brain tumor known as a glioblastoma was associated with the blood clot” that was removed.  The statement is posted on McCain’s website.  McCain himself conveyed optimism and confidence that “any future treatment will be effective” and a decision on when he will return to the Senate will be made after further consultations with his medical team.

On Friday, the House passed legislation that would create a Space Corps within the Air Force while a former Secretary of the Air Force and former Commander of U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) argued against it at a seminar across town.

Michael Donley served as Secretary of the Air Force from 2008-2013 as part of his 39 years of government service. Gen. C. Robert Kehler (Ret.) served of Commander of STRATCOM from 2011-2013 and Commander of Air Force Space Command from 2007-2011.  At a meeting sponsored by George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute and the Aerospace Corporation, they echoed comments by current Air Force officials that now is not the right time to separate space from the rest of the warfighting force.  Instead, integrating space into the other warfighting domains — land, sea, air and cyber — is what’s needed.

The bipartisan leadership of the House Armed Services Committee’s (HASC’s) Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL) and Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN), included the provision to create a U.S. Space Corps within the Air Force analogous to the Marine Corps within the Department of the Navy in the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA, H.R. 2810),   It would also create a U.S. Space Command as a subunit of STRATCOM.  They are ardent advocates for this reorganization as is HASC chairman Mac Thornberry (R-TX).

The White House, Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein oppose it, as did other members of HASC during markup of the bill on June 28.  Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), a former chairman of the Strategic Forces subcommittee, introduced an amendment to remove the provision, but it was defeated by voice vote.  He attempted to bring the issue to the floor of the House for debate, but the House Rules Committee did not approve his amendment.  The bill passed the House on Friday with the provision intact.

Kehler said the proposed solution does not fit the problem, which is acquisition.  “That’s why people are frustrated,” not because of how DOD is organized.  “Most organizational change doesn’t fix the problem and is a distraction,” costs more than expected and soon changes again.  “The space enterprise is filled with examples of the wreckage of some of the other things we’ve tried.”

The problem that needs to be solved is how to “posture ourselves to be prepared for conflict that extends into space” the same way we think about conflict extending into air or sea. “We know how to do this,” Kehler insisted.  It is a matter of “the grunt work of joint warfighting” and the military services providing combatant commanders with “forces that can operate and accomplish their missions in the face of a contested domain.”  Reorganization is not the answer.  “We have a warfighting organization in place today with all the authority and responsibility necessary.  It’s called STRATCOM.”

Donley agreed. “I don’t favor this proposal.  It is the opposite of the trends we’re trying to achieve” of integrating space into airspace and cyberspace.  The result will be more bureaucracy, “exactly what Congress has been telling the Department not to do.”

Kehler summed it up by repeating that the problem is acquisition. “That’s what we need to fix” and it’s not magic. Many studies have been done.  “We know what’s broken. Fix it.”

The Trump Administration informed the House that it does not agree on the need for the Space Corps proposed in the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  The White House Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) called the proposal premature because DOD is still in the process of studying potential organizational changes.  The White House used stronger language to object to two other space provisions in the bill.  The House began debate on the bill (H.R. 2810) this afternoon. [UPDATE: The House passed the bill with the Space Corps provision intact on July 14, 2017.]

Section 1601 of the bill proposes creating a Space Corps within the Air Force analogous to the Marine Corps within the Department of the Navy, and a U.S. Space Command within U.S. Strategic Command.  Proposed by House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Strategic Forces subcommittee chairman Mike Rogers (R-AL) and ranking member Jim Cooper (D-TN), it was strongly backed by HASC chairman Mac Thornberry (R-TX) during full committee markup of the bill.  It was opposed by others, however.  Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), a former chairman of the subcommittee, offered an amendment to delete the provision, but it was rejected by voice vote.  Turner proposed his amendment again for consideration by the full House.   Such amendments must be approved by the House Rules Committee. As of press time, it is not on that committee’s list of amendments that have been made in order for floor debate.

The White House SAP was gently worded, saying it appreciates HASC’s concerns and “we understand the increasing threats posed to our continued use of space capabilities.”  DOD is already considering “a wide range of organizational options, including a Space Corps,” and the White House wants to wait until that assessment is completed before making decisions.

The SAP uses stronger language to object to two other provisions.  Section 1615 restricts the use of funding for Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELVs) to developing new rocket propulsion systems to replace “non-allied space launch engines” (a reference to Russia’s RD-180 engines used for Atlas V) and modifications to launch vehicles to accommodate them.  The money may not be used for entirely new space launch systems (propulsion plus the rest of the rocket and associated infrastructure).  The Trump Administration “strongly objects” to that section because it “limits domestic competition, which will increase taxpayer costs by several billions of dollars through FY2027 and stifle innovation.”   DOD already has a strategy for developing new launch systems that has “saved $300 million” and the provision in the bill would make that strategy “impossible to execute.”

The Trump Administration also strongly objects to Section 1612 that limits DOD’s ability to procure satellite services from certain foreign entities.  The bill prohibits buying satellite services if the satellite or its launch vehicle is designed or manufactured in a “covered foreign country,” which for the purposes of this section includes Russia.  The SAP points out that three-quarters of DOD’s satellite communications services are from “foreign-incorporated companies that make widespread use of international launch vehicles.”

In total, the White House SAP listed 27 provisions in the bill it finds particularly troubling, but the tone of the statement is more friendly that many of those issued by the Obama Administration. This SAP repeatedly says the White House looks forward to working with Congress to resolve the issues, whereas SAPs from the last Administration often said if a bill was not changed, the President’s advisors would recommend that he veto it.   That likely is because Republicans now control the House, Senate, and White House and this is the Trump Administration’s first year in office.

The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) today released the text of the bill and report for its version of the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  Unlike its House counterpart, SASC completed all its subcommittee and full committee markups in closed session, so this is the first time details have emerged.  Although the bill does not create a Space Corps like the House bill proposes, it has its own plan for dramatic change in how space programs are handled within DOD.

Section 902 would create the position of Chief Information Warfare Officer (CIWO) reporting directly to the Secretary of Defense (SecDef).   The CIWO would serve as the Principal Cyber Advisor to the SecDef and the Principal DOD Space Advisor (PDSA).

Both positions already exist. The Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA) was created by Congress in the FY2014 NDAA.  The position is filled by a deputy assistant secretary for cyber policy, though it is vacant at the moment.

The PDSA position was created by Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work in October 2015 and is filled by the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF).  The office almost immediately came under criticism from Congress.  In the FY2016 NDAA, SASC required the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the effectiveness of the office.  GAO concluded in a July 27, 2016 report that it was too early to tell, but skepticism remained.  SecAF Deborah Lee James was the first PDSA and there was speculation she might be the last as well.  However, current SecAF Heather Wilson now has the job.

Today’s bill (S. 1519) and report (S. Rept. 115-125) make clear that SASC still is not convinced that PCA and PDSA are solving the problems.  SASC’s concern is that in three areas — information, space, and cyber — no individual has the authority to set priorities. As the report explains:

“The committee has concerns that the existing organizational construct and resourcing authorities within [DOD] for space, cyber, and information are not commensurate with the organizational structure and resourcing required to meet the demands of 21st century warfare. … Until there is an official in the [DOD] who can prioritize these missions, the committee is concerned that the priorities for space, cyber, and information will never receive the resourcing and senior level attention necessary to compete against the parochial interests of each individual Service.”

The CIWO would have a very broad portfolio.

“The CIWO would have the authority to establish policy for and direct the secretaries of the military departments and the heads of all other elements of the Department on matters concerning: (1) Space and space launch systems; (2) Communications networks and information technology (other than business systems); (3) National Security Systems; (4) Information assurance and cybersecurity; (5) Electronic warfare and cyber warfare; (6) Nuclear command and control and senior leadership communications systems; (7) Command and Control systems and networks; (8) The electromagnetic spectrum; (9) Positioning, navigation, and timing; and (10) Any other matters assigned to the Chief Information Officer of the [DOD] not related to business systems or management, …”

Separately, the bill would require the Commander of Air Force Space Command to serve a term of at least 6 years in order to provide continuity of leadership similar to that for the Navy’s nuclear propulsion program and strategic systems program.

The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) also is proposing a major reorganization, although it is focused on space, not a combination of space, cyber and information.

Its approach is entirely different, proposing creation of a Space Corps within the Air Force, and a U.S. Space Command within U.S. Strategic Command.  The House provision is very controversial.  It is strongly supported by the chairman and ranking member of HASC’s Strategic Forces subcommittee, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL) and Jim Cooper (D-TN), as well as full committee chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX).  During markup of the bill at full committee on June 28, however, Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), a former chairman of that subcommittee, offered an amendment to delete the provision on the basis that it is premature and more deliberation is needed.  The amendment failed on a voice vote.  Turner has proposed it again for debate by the full House.  The House Rules Committee meets tomorrow to decide which amendments will be permitted.

What is clear is that both committees want dramatic changes in how space programs and policy are handled at DOD, but they have very different solutions.  Finding a compromise between the two chambers will be challenging enough, but the bill also will have to be signed by the President, so DOD will have its own say in the matter.