Jeff Foust reports on a forum where that is the topic of discussion. The (unsurprising, or at least it should be to readers of this weblog) answer is, “no.”
Space, at least civil space, is not important, and has not been since the early 1960s. What is more dismaying, though, is that military space is not treated seriously, either, and that really should be considered important.
The panel also doesn’t think much of reviving the Space Council. I agree that the focal point should not be at OSTP, and that space does need a more serious advocate on the National Security Council.
I wonder why Jeff doesn’t quote anyone by name? Was he reporting under restrictions?
[Update in the afternoon]
Apparently, he was. He writes over at Space Politics:
Because of the ground rules of the discussion, none of the comments are attributed to any of the attendees.
I’d be curious to know at least who the attendees were, even if we can’t correlate specific statements with specific attendees. Is that a secret, too?
Also at The Space Review today, a good tutorial on how to tell a launch system from a ballistic missile.
I should note that one point not made here is that it’s actually easier to build a launch vehicle than an effective ballistic missile, if one defines “effective” as being able to hit a precise target, because the latter requires an entry vehicle. Getting into orbit, per se, does not require a precise injection, or heat shields, as long as the resulting trajectory doesn’t intercept the atmosphere.
Finally, Dwayne Day clears up (or at least attempts to clear up) media misconceptions about the Chinese space program.
[Mid-afternoon update]
Jeff provides the list of speakers, though it’s still not clear whether the quotes are from speakers or attendees.