DOCSLIB.ORG

Impacts of the Lightsquared Network on Federal Science Activities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Impacts of the Lightsquared Network on Federal Science Activities IMPACTS OF THE LIGHTSQUARED NETWORK ON FEDERAL SCIENCE ACTIVITIES HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 Serial No. 112–33 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 68–227PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HON. RALPH M. HALL, Texas, Chair F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas Wisconsin JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland BRAD MILLER, North Carolina FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona W. TODD AKIN, Missouri DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas BEN R. LUJA´ N, New Mexico PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia PAUL D. TONKO, New York SANDY ADAMS, Florida JERRY MCNERNEY, California BENJAMIN QUAYLE, Arizona JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama Tennessee FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia HANSEN CLARKE, Michigan STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi VACANCY MO BROOKS, Alabama ANDY HARRIS, Maryland RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana DAN BENISHEK, Michigan VACANCY (II) C O N T E N T S Thursday, September 8, 2011 Page Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 Opening Statements Statement by Representative Ralph M. Hall, Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 12 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 13 Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Minority Mem- ber, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Rep- resentatives ........................................................................................................... 14 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 15 Witnesses: Mr. Anthony Russo, Director, the National Coordination Office for Space- Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 17 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 19 Ms. Mary Glackin, Deputy Under Secretary, National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 29 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 30 Mr. Victor Sparrow, Director, Spectrum Policy, Space Communications and Navigation, Space Operations Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 34 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 36 Hon. Peter H. Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Department of Transportation Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 39 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 40 Dr. David Applegate, Associate Director, Natural Hazards, U.S. Geological Survey Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 43 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 44 Mr. Jeffrey J. Carlisle, Executive Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Public Policy, LightSquared Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 46 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 48 Dr. Scott Pace, Director, Space Policy Institute, George Washington Univer- sity Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 75 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 77 Discussion ................................................................................................................. 88 (III) IV Page Appendix 1: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions Mr. Anthony Russo, Director, the National Coordination Office for Space- Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing ....................................................... 106 Ms. Mary Glackin, Deputy Under Secretary, National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration .......................................................................................... 115 Mr. Victor Sparrow, Director, Spectrum Policy, Space Communications and Navigation, Space Operations Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration ................................................................................... 132 Hon. Peter H. Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Department of Transportation ................................................ 141 Dr. David Applegate, Associate Director, Natural Hazards, U.S. Geological Survey ................................................................................................................... 147 Mr. Jeffrey J. Carlisle, Executive Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Public Policy, LightSquared ................................................................................ 151 Dr. Scott Pace, Director, Space Policy Institute, George Washington Univer- sity ......................................................................................................................... 164 Appendix 2: Additional Material for the Record Prepared Statement of Mr. Randy Neugebauer, U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology .......................................................................... 172 Letter from Members of Congress to Hon. Julius Genachowski, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC ................................. 173 Response to Hon. Randy Neugebauer from Hon. Julius Genachowski, Chair- man, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC ........................ 178 Written Statement of the Coalition to Save Our GPS, Presented to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology .................................................. 179 Letter to Hon. Ralph M. Hall, Chairman, U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology from Mr. Malcolm D. Jackson, Assistant Adminis- trator and Chief Information Officer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agen- cy ........................................................................................................................... 196 Letter to Hon. Ralph M. Hall, Chairman, U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology from Mr. Michael W. Locatis III, Chief Information Officer, U.S. Department of Energy ................................................................... 197 Letter to Hon. Ralph M. Hall, Chairman, U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology from Mr. Subra Suresh, Director, National Science Foundation ............................................................................................................ 198 Letter to Mr. Larry Strickling, Assistant Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Depart- ment of Commerce from NASA ........................................................................... 199 Federal Aviation Administration: LightSquared Impact to Aviation: FAA Per- spective: PowerPoint Presentation to U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ......................................................................................... 204 Letter to Mr. Karl B. Nebbia, Associate Administrator, National Tele- communications and Information Administration from Mr. Joel Szabat, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation ................................................................................................. 219 Memorandum for Mr. Karl Nebbia, Associate Administrator, National Tele- communications and Information Administration from Deanna Archuleta, Senior Advisor to the Secretary, Department of the Interior ........................... 252 IMPACTS OF THE LIGHTSQUARED NETWORK ON FEDERAL SCIENCE ACTIVITIES THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:19 p.m., in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ralph Hall [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. (1) 2 3 HEARING CHARTER COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 October 10, 2019 Scott Scheele, Esq. Chief, Telecommunications And
    October 10, 2019 Scott Scheele, Esq. Chief, Telecommunications and Broadband Section Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice 450 Fifth Street NW, Suite 7000 Washington, DC 20530 Re: United States v. Deutsche Telekom AG, et al., No. 1:19-cv-02232-TJK TUNNEY ACT COMMENTS OF THE COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA Introduction. The proposed Final Judgment (“PFJ”) violates a number of clearly articulated Antitrust Division policies on merger remedies. These policies, incorporated in current policy guidance documents and in speeches by Division officials, are aimed at ensuring that antitrust remedies are appropriate, effective and principled. The remedy here satisfies none of these goals. The Division has not articulated any reasons, let alone principled reasons, why it has turned its back on its own merger remedy policies in this case, many of which are long-standing and represent sound antitrust enforcement. The Division has recently and successfully asserted a number of its merger remedy policies in litigated cases as a basis for rejecting proposed fixes to anticompetitive mergers, including one in which the proposed divestiture package did not include the network necessary for the buyer successfully to compete. That has particular relevance here. Judged from the standpoint of the competitive harm alleged in the Complaint, the divestiture assets do not restore the competition lost by the elimination of Sprint as an independent competitor under the theories of harm alleged in the complaint and in the product market alleged in the complaint. The divestitures create a Mobile Virtual Network Operator (“MVNO”), but the theories of harm and market definition treat competition from MVNOs as de minimis.
    [Show full text]
  • Securing U.S. Leadership in Space
    SECURING U.S. LEADERSHIP IN SPACE September 22, 2012 Introduction America’s space program is a strategic national asset crucial to both our security and our economy. The space capabilities of the United States and its allies create strategic military and intelligence advantages that must be maintained. U.S. satellite networks facilitate communications, navigation, remote sensing, and environmental monitoring that support the global economic infrastructure and protect the safety and security of people around the world. It is almost impossible from the modern vantage point to even imagine growing the world’s food, moving its people and cargo, operating its markets, or keeping its peace without operating effectively far above its surface. Because space is vital to our national interests and provides important benefits to science and innovation, protecting these interests and securing these benefits requires a clear and credible space policy that addresses civil, commercial, and national security activities. Just as important are the implementation and follow-through, in which policies, programs, and budgets are aligned with each other. NASA, the Department of Defense, and other agencies involved in space need to be given clear and stable priorities so that they can make pragmatic, sustainable trade-offs in managing their programs to achieve the best value for the American taxpayer. Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to deliver a coherent policy for human space exploration and space security. As a result, he has created uncertainty and confusion within U.S. industry and the international community. The President’s disjointed collection of scientific projects lack guiding principles, plausible objectives, or a roadmap for long-run success.
    [Show full text]
  • Next Steps for U.S.-Japan Space Cooperation
    NEXT STEPS FOR U.S.-JAPAN SPACE COOPERATION In March 2016, the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation convened the fourth meeting of the U.S.-Japan Space Forum, a gathering of American and Japanese experts from the private sector, academia, and government. Over four meetings since its inception in 2014, the Forum has assessed the fluid space environment – marked by changes in the constellation of space actors, new uses of space, proliferating security threats, and persistent constraint of resources in both the United States and Japan. Inspired in part by Japan’s adoption of its Basic Plan on Space Policy in January 2013, the members of the Forum determined early on that promoting collaboration between the Japanese and American space sectors would help both nations address emerging challenges and take advantage of new opportunities to use space to advance common interests. Reflecting on the track-one “Comprehensive Dialogue on Space,” which is scheduled to meet this autumn, the members of the Forum recently published a concise list of recommendations for consideration by Japanese and American officials. On September 9th, 2016, the Mansfield Foundation will partner with the George Washington University Space Policy Institute on a public seminar discussing the path forward for U.S.-Japan collaboration in space. Members of the U.S.- Japan Space Forum will share their recently published recommendations. The seminar will also invite commentary from a broader subset of stakeholders in regional security and space activities, including members of the 2016 Prague Security Studies Institute (PSSI) Trilateral Europe-U.S.-Japan Space Security Partnership Conference. 9 September, 2016, 9:00AM – 1:00PM Linder Family Commons, George Washington University Elliott School 1957 E Street (6th Floor), Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Read It Here
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. _______________________ CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS’ AND FIREFIGHTERS’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM, derivatively on behalf of nominal defendant DISH NETWORK CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES W. ERGEN, JOSEPH P. CLAYTON, JAMES DEFRANCO, CANTEY M. ERGEN, STEVEN R. GOODBARN, DAVID K. MOSKOWITZ, TOM A. ORTOLF, and CARL E. VOGEL, Defendants, and DISH NETWORK CORPORATION, Nominal Defendant. VERIFIEDDEADLINE.com SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT Plaintiff City of Daytona Beach Police Officers’ and Firefighters’ Retirement System (“City of Daytona” or “Plaintiff”) brings the following Verified Shareholder Derivative Complaint (the “Complaint”), for the benefit of nominal defendant DISH Network Corporation (“Dish” or the “Company”), against the Company’s founder, chairman, and controlling shareholder Charles W. Ergen (“Ergen”) and the members of the board of directors of Dish (the “Board”). The allegations of the Complaint are based on the knowledge of Plaintiff as to itself, and on information and belief, including the investigation of counsel and review of publicly available information, as to all other matters. INTRODUCTION 1. This action arises from the complete failure of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) to withstand the domineering influence of Dish’s controlling shareholder Ergen. Dish is a satellite TV provider that recently has spent billions of dollars to expand its business by acquiring wireless spectrum licenses. In April 2013, Ergen completed the purchase of more than $1 billion of debt of a bankrupt company, LightSquared, L.P. (“LightSquared”), which owns such spectrum licenses. In May, 2013, Ergen launched a personal $2 billion bid for LightSquared’s spectrum assets – a bid that directly competed with Dish’s clear interests in bidding for these same assets.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2000 – February 2001)
    U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century (click on heading to be linked directly to that section) Phase 1 (July 1998 - August 1999) Major Themes And Implications Supporting Research And Analysis Phase 2 (August 2000 – April 2000) Seeking A National Strategy: A Concert For Preserving Security And Promoting Freedom Phase 3 (April 2000 – February 2001) Roadmap For National Security: Imperative For Change 71730_DAPS.qx 10/12/99 5:06 PM Page #1 NEW WORLD COMING: AMERICAN SECURITY IN THE 21ST CENTURY MAJOR THEMES AND IMPLICATIONS The Phase I Report on the Emerging Global Security Environment for the First Quarter of the 21st Century The United States Commission on National Security/21st Century September 15, 1999 71730_DAPS.qx 10/12/99 5:06 PM Page #3 Preface In 1947, President Harry Truman signed into law the National Security Act, the landmark U.S. national security legislation of the latter half of the 20th century. The 1947 legislation has served us well. It has undergirded our diplomatic efforts, provided the basis to establish our military capa- bilities, and focused our intelligence assets. But the world has changed dramatically in the last fifty years, and particularly in the last decade. Institutions designed in another age may or may not be appropriate for the future. It is the mandate of the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century to examine precise- ly that question. It has undertaken to do so in three phases: the first to describe the world emerging in the first quarter of the next century, the second to design a national security strategy appropri- ate to that world, and the third to propose necessary changes to the national security structure in order to implement that strategy effectively.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Positioning System
    The Global Positioning System Assessing National Policies Scott Pace • Gerald Frost • Irving Lachow David Frelinger • Donna Fossum Donald K. Wassem • Monica Pinto Prepared for the Executive Office of the President Office of Science and Technology Policy CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES INSTITUTE R The research described in this report was supported by RAND’s Critical Technologies Institute. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data The global positioning system : assessing national policies / Scott Pace ... [et al.]. p cm. “MR-614-OSTP.” “Critical Technologies Institute.” “Prepared for the Office of Science and Technology Policy.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-8330-2349-7 (alk. paper) 1. Global Positioning System. I. Pace, Scott. II. United States. Office of Science and Technology Policy. III. Critical Technologies Institute (RAND Corporation). IV. RAND (Firm) G109.5.G57 1995 623.89´3—dc20 95-51394 CIP © Copyright 1995 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve public policy through research and analysis. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. Cover Design: Peter Soriano Published 1995 by RAND 1700 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/ To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Internet: [email protected] PREFACE The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a constellation of orbiting satellites op- erated by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • China's Growing Space Capabilities
    Testimony Before the U.S.­China Economic and Security Review Commission “China’s Growing Space Capabilities: Implications for the United States” Wednesday, May 11, 2011 Dr. Scott Pace, Director, Space Policy Institute, Elliott School of International Affairs, The George Washington University Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing an opportunity to discuss this important topic. Earlier presentations today have covered Administration and Congressional views along with perspectives on China’s military space programs and their implications. I am honored to provide some thoughts on China’s civil space program and what implications it might have for the United States. China launched its first satellite in 1970 – the same year as the first satellite launch for Japan. It began offering commercial launch services in 1985, launched its first astronaut in 2003, and sent its first probe to the Moon in 2006. China conducted its first space walk in 2008 and is actively developing a space laboratory and an even more ambitious space station. The first point that should be made is that China does not have a fully separate civil space program in the model of NASA and U.S. civil space activities. China’s development of space capabilities began in the mid­1950s at the direction of the Central Military Commission, less than a decade after the founding of the People’s Republic. The development of space launch vehicles were part of the same development of diverse aerospace capabilities such as rockets, guided missiles, and aviation. China’s human space flight efforts are managed by the elements of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and require industrial capabilities that are the same as those used for military programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Bloomberg Billionaires Index Order Now, Wear It Tomorrow
    Bloomberg the Company & Its Products Bloomberg Anywhere Remote Login Bloomberg Terminal Demo Request Bloomberg Menu Search Sign In Subscribe Bloomberg Billionaires Index Order now, wear it tomorrow. That's next day View profiles for each of the world’s 50de0livery for you* richest people, see the biggest movers, and compare fortunes or track returns. As of July 18, 2018 The Bloomberg Billionaires Index is a daily ranking of the world’s richest people. Details about the calculations are provided in the net worth analysis on each billionaire’s profile page. The figures are updated at the close of every trading day in New York. Rank Name Total net worth $ Last change $ YTD change Country Industry 1 Jeff Bezos $152B +$1.69B +$53.2B United States Technology 2 Bill Gates $95.3B +$5.13M +$3.54B United States Technology 3 Mark Zuckerberg $83.8B +$967M +$11.0B United States Technology 4 Warren Buffett $79.2B -$3.82B -$6.14B United States Diversified 5 Bernard Arnault $75.0B +$252M +$11.7B France Consumer 6 Amancio Ortega $74.9B +$78.3M -$427M Spain Retail 7 Carlos Slim $62.7B -$382M +$1.19B Mexico Diversified 8 Larry Page $58.4B +$630M +$5.98B United States Technology 9 Sergey Brin $56.9B +$608M +$5.78B United States Technology 10 Larry Ellison $55.2B +$359M +$2.12B United States Technology Francoise Bettencourt 11 Meyers $49.2B +$14.1M +$4.73B France Consumer 12 Charles Koch $46.9B +$247M -$1.27B United States Industrial 13 David Koch $46.9B +$247M -$1.27B United States Industrial 14 Jack Ma $44.4B +$317M -$1.08B China Technology 15 Mukesh Ambani $44.0B
    [Show full text]
  • To the Moon, NASA? Not on This Budget, Experts Say 26 August 2009, by SETH BORENSTEIN , AP Science Writer
    To the moon, NASA? Not on this budget, experts say 26 August 2009, By SETH BORENSTEIN , AP Science Writer at least an extra $30 billion through 2020. Even NASA's soon-to-be-retired space shuttle fleet has proved that getting off the ground isn't a given, with two launch scrubs this week of a mission to the international space station. The space station is finally finished. Yet NASA's long-standing plans call for junking the outpost in about seven years. If the agency keeps that schedule, it would mean that in the next decade NASA's astronauts could be going nowhere if there's no moon mission. In this Aug. 14, 2009 photo, a new space vehicle stands Obama's special panel looked at other options ready in NASA Kennedy Space Center's Vehicle Assembly Building in Florida. The final segments of the available for the space program - such as skipping Ares I-X rocket, including the simulated crew module the moon and going directly to Mars or an asteroid, and launch abort system, were stacked on Aug. 13 on a or just cruising in the solar system. But they kept mobile launcher platform, completing the 327-foot launch using words like "least worst scenario" during their vehicle and providing the first entire look of Ares I-X's final public deliberations earlier this month. In their distinctive shape. The Ares I-X flight test is targeted for report due Monday, they will also give advice about Oct. 31. (AP Photo/ NASA) the end of the shuttle and space station programs.
    [Show full text]
  • J.D. Power Ranks Dish Network No. 1 in Customer Satisfaction; Echostar Ranks Ahead of Cable, Satellite Competitors in Overall Customer Satisfaction
    J.D. Power Ranks Dish Network No. 1 in Customer Satisfaction; EchoStar Ranks Ahead of Cable, Satellite Competitors in Overall Customer Satisfaction LITTLETON, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 1, 1999--EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ: DISH, DISHP) is pleased to announce today that DISH Network™ ranked number one in overall customer satisfaction in the pay-TV industry, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 1999 Cable/Satellite TV Customer Satisfaction Study(SM). In addition, DISH Network outranked its satellite TV competitor, DirecTV, for the third year in a row in customer satisfaction. Also, EchoStar beat all of the cable companies in the customer satisfaction survey, particularly in the two most important drivers of customer satisfaction: cost of service and program offerings. "EchoStar is pleased to accept the number one ranking in overall customer satisfaction with respect to DISH Network's satellite television service," said Charlie Ergen, CEO and chairman of EchoStar. "At DISH Network, we work hard everyday to communicate one-on-one with our customers, to keep our prices the lowest in the industry and to continue improving our channel offerings. The launch of our next satellite on Sept. 10 demonstrates our ongoing commitment to customer satisfaction as we become the first in the nation to offer 500 channels on a single dish, including local network channels, high definition television and interactive TV services." DISH Network also outranked other satellite and cable pay TV competitors in the categories of image/credibility/billing, customer service, equipment and service capabilities, and reception quality. "Congratulations to our employees at DISH Network, who are excited to hear that their hard work and training in providing customer service have paid off by being named number one in the industry in overall customer satisfaction," said Soraya Hesabi-Cartwright, senior vice president of Sales, Customer Service and Human Resources at EchoStar.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Scott Pace Director, Space Policy Institute Elliott School of International Affairs the George Washington University
    Hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology “Mars Flyby 2021: The First Deep Space Mission for the Orion and Space Launch System?” Thursday, February 27, 2014 - 10:00 AM – RHOB 2318 Testimony of Dr. Scott Pace Director, Space Policy Institute Elliott School of International Affairs The George Washington UniVersity Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing an opportunity to discuss the important topic of a strategic framework for U.S. human spaceflight and specifically, the opportunity for a human flyby and return to the vicinity of Mars in 2021 – only seven years from now. While space touches every aspect of modern life, I would like to focus on human space exploration, as that topic is the one whose future is most in doubt today. This is unfortunate, as human space activities are among the most interdisciplinary of enterprises, requiring skills from every field of technical endeavor. Their successful accomplishment requires a degree of systems engineering skill found only in the most complex and demanding programs. The ability and willingness of a nation to lead such endeavors conveys much about the nature and intentions of that society. Thus, human spaceflight continues to possess great symbolic value, both domestically and internationally, and is therefore a matter of considerable interest to policymakers, and should be. I have argued that international space cooperation, space commerce, and international space security discussions could be used to reinforce each other in ways that would advance U.S. interests in the sustainability and security of all space activities. At present, however, these activities are largely conducted on their individual merits and not as part of integrated national strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Landscape of Advancement in Higher Education
    The Changing Landscape of Advancement in Higher Education Bruce W. Flessner National & • Economics • Demand for education Global Trends • Nationalism and Globalism Higher • Broken budget models Education • Falling Public confidence Trends • Attack on Philanthropists Advancement • Understanding our donors Challenges • Staffing challenges Economics: Growth in wealth continues In 2018 world-wide household wealth exceeded $317 trillion, a 4.6% increase from 2017 North American household wealth reached $107 trillion in 2018, an annual increase of 6.5%. Wealth as grown in the United States in the past decade. September 2018 Tipping Point For the first time in history, a majority of the world is middle class or richer. Those in poverty or vulnerable to poverty are now a minority. We will live in a middle-class world. 2018: 3.7 billion middle class 2020: 4 billion middle class 2030: 5.3 billion middle class 2030: Poor decline by 150 million Vulnerable decline by 900 million 18 16 14 12 10 8 Middle 6 Class 4 Market in 2 2030 0 United States China India In 2000, 95 percent of the Fortune Global 500—the world’s largest international companies —were headquartered in developed economies. By 2025, China will be home to more large companies than either the United States or Europe. By 2025 half of the world’s large companies—those with revenue of $1 billion or more—to be headquartered in emerging markets Rising middle class leads to more university students. 2000: 100 million students world-wide 2014: Over 200 million university students 2030: Projected 330 million students The number of China: - 2% international students India: - 1.2% studying in the United Korea: - 7.6% States fell another 2.7% Saudi: - 17.1% this past year.
    [Show full text]