Exploring the Unknown - NASA's History Office

EXPLORING THE UNKNOWN 325
world.
The program has been an enormous scientific success, and it has been a great source
of international good will for our Nation.
Landsat, unlike weather satellites, might profitably be operated by the private sector,
since the data that it produces are of use not only to scientific researchers and to
Government agencies, but also to a number of private companies, including oil and mineral
exploration firms and various agricultural interests.
I agree with the administration that the time is right to investigate our options for
commercializing this emerging technology, especially since the United States will face stiff
competition in the field of land remote-sensing from the French and the Japanese by the
mid- to late-l980’s.
I disagree strongly, however, with the administration’s perverse approach to this international
challenge—namely, to kill immediately all funding for the Landsat program and
to put our civilian weather satellites, an inherently governmental system, up for sale.
The administration pursued these policies under the assumption that U.S. industry
would rush into competition with subsidized French and Japanese systems by launching
fully private land remote-sensing systems.
Predictably the gamble failed.
No U.S. industry could possibly enter this field at the present time without some form
of temporary Government subsidy.
This subsidy is a necessary evil if we hope to avoid giving up another potentially lucrative
commercial opportunity to our competitors.
The irony of our deteriorating situation, of course, is that this commercial opportunity
exists only because the U.S. taxpayer, over the past 12 years, has supported a Landsat
program which has convincingly demonstrated the feasibility of commercial land remote
sensing.
Mr. Speaker, many of us share a deep concern that the United States is about to fritter
away its technological leadership in an area where, over the next 20 years, we expect
to see tremendous global commercial expansion.
In this case, our industrial expansion and ability to compete in global markets is threatened
not by a lack of resources, nor by a lack of creativity, nor by a lack of productivity.
We are threatened solely by Government inaction.
I believe we still have time to preserve our remote-sensing industry, but only if we act
expeditiously on two fronts.
First, we need to halt this absurd proposal to commercialize weather satellites. It is a
silly diversion from the main global game—Landsat. We must get our eye on the ball.
Next, we need to agree on a policy which will effect a rational transition between
Government operation of land remote-sensing systems and fully private operation of these
systems.
Last week, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. VOLKMER) and I held 2 days of joint
hearings on draft legislation aimed at effecting such a transition.
Concurrent with our consideration of this draft legislation, the administration has
been preparing a request-for-proposal (RFP) to solicit industry bids on present and future
land remote-sensing systems.
I was greatly heartened by the testimony that we received on the legislation, both from
witnesses representing U.S. industry and from the administration’s witness, Mr. Ray
Kammer, who is chairman of the Source Evaluation Board for Civil Remote Sensing.
Mr. Kammer found many parallels and few major inconsistencies between his efforts
and the provisions of the legislation, and I look forward to working with Mr. Kammer and
others in the administration to insure that, as Congress articulates a coherent policy for
commercializing land remote-sensing activities over the next 6 months, the administration