Dave Kopel and Instantman have a sensible suggestion (one that I've made myself). It's time, indeed past time, to withdraw from that other relic of the Cold War, the Outer Space Treaty.

[Update at 12:32 PM PDT]

Jim Bennett notes that there's at least one other reason to get rid of the treaty that Glenn didn't mention.

...the OST and its Liability Convention also raise the cost of space launch by assigning strict liability to all earth-to-space operations. This is no longer warranted for ordinary launch operations. Withdrawing from the OST should be accompanied by a new Liability Convention creating a more reasonable liability regime.

Yes. This could also affect the existing regulatory environment for spaceflight in the US, since the existing regulations are based on that strict liability.

The Empire begins...

Whether the US officially withdraws from it or not, the Outer Space Treaty won't last once people start inhabiting space in the true sense of the word... I've always been amazed that the United States ever endorsed such a socialistic document in the first place. They must have figured it would save a lot of money...

Glenn didn't mention it, but the OST and its Liability Convention also raise the cost of space launch by assigning strict liability to all earth-to-space operations. This is no longer warranted for ordinary launch operations. Withdrawing from the OST should be accompanied by a new Liability Convention creating a more reasonable liability regime.

One thing the OST does provide is some semblance of order in the allocation of geo-orbit slots and related frequency allocations. Right now, the option to a certain frequency at a certain slot can be a very valuable asset. I've worked on several space program start ups where the first item needed to raise capital was orbit slot. Without a slot you were out of luck. If you were to dump the treaty, we would need another to manage the radio noise in space.

Orbital slots have almost nothing to do with the OST. That's mostly up to the RORC and WARC.