Obviously, the gentleman is reading one paragraph, but the very next paragraph negates the criticism of the bill, and that is the very next paragraph underneath the one he is reading suggests that if there is a reason for the FAA to be concerned, if there is a flaw that can be pointed out, then it may step in to prevent a fatality or a serious accident. The question is whether the FAA and the bureaucracy should be able to control the design of a new space launch vehicle before there are any problems. Should then the space launch bureaucrats, the people who are in government, who are in public service override the entrepreneur, overside the scientist, override the experts and should they be in the pilot seat even if there is no indication that there is any problem with the design? Now I think that would strangle the baby in the crib. In fact, it would destroy this fledgling industry and send it overseas. What we are talking about is an aerospace industry that needs all the help it can get being limited from anybody paying for a flight and then sending their job overseas. That makes no sense at all.
Dana Rohrabacher: “Obviously, the gentleman is reading one paragraph, but the very next paragraph negates the criticism of the bill, and…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of FAA regulations on the space launch vehicle industry.
Share
More from Dana Rohrabacher
We need to be--make sure that the Muslim population of the world knows that we are not against their religion.
let us declare that the Government of Burma is an outlaw among nations because this is not inconsistent with their behavior over the last 30 years and the military has--and we declared that the military is guilty of crimes against humanity.
I mean, Ukraine, we've spent $1 billion in Ukraine, I guess, in the last couple years and everybody acknowledges the level of corruption there is just dramatic.
I remember, like, one of the things when I first got here was the Clinton administration's insistence on spending what was the equivalent of $50 million providing fuel for North Korea, and it had just the opposite impact.





