The Californian Coastal Commission have voted down a request from SpaceX to increase space flights.
Launch limits per year were already upgraded in 2024 from 6 to 36.
SpaceX requested this number be increased to 50.
Although environmental concerns weighed in on the final decision, others believe the deciding factors were viciously political.
Commissioner Mike Wilson registered his concerns saying that he wanted to know about who gets a cut of the profits. His questions largely revolved around the public versus private dimensions associated with SpaceX’s request to increase its launches.
Between SpaceX and Space Force, he asked, ‘Is there transparency? Is this really to the benefit of citizens of the United States?’
‘My concern,’ he added, ‘is national security, and that we’re linking these – the private and the public together.’
After 12-minutes of rambling, Wilson finally admitted his concerns related more specifically to Musk.
‘We are talking about SpaceX,’ he declared. ‘I just want to put it out there: this company is owned by the richest person in the world with direct control of what could be the biggest global communications system on the planet.’
‘Just last week [Elon Musk] was speaking about political retribution on a national stage. It was very glib, yet he was standing next to [President Donald Trump who] openly promotes working to normalise that language.’
‘We can’t hide from that,’ Wilson declared, ‘we have to push back against that.’
In the dock (so to speak), United States Space Force’s Dr Ravi Chaudhary brilliantly navigated the loaded questions, replying, ‘For the sake of national security, USSF aims to be as apolitical as possible.’
Reading a scripted statement ‘into the record’, Gretchen Newsom said, ‘I have the following brief statement to share. Today I seek to bring light to the troubling situation between SpaceX and its operations.’
Newsom said at the beginning of her speech (starting at around -3.07 hours into the recording):
‘Recent findings reveal a pattern of disregard for employee welfare and regulatory compliance that raises serious concerns. Firstly, let’s consider the open letter from SpaceX employees which highlighted a toxic workplace culture, likening it to a frat house with harassment.’
She went on to cite further reports, claims, and lawsuits related Musk’s companies.
Unions targeted the SpaceX boss again in January and June 2024, riding a wave of left-wing political rhetoric designed to undermine advertiser confidence in X (formally Twitter) and Elon Musk’s leadership.
Continuing her open letter, and vowing to hold Musk accountable, Newsom exclaimed:
‘This pattern on negligence should not be overlooked and it reflects poorly on the stewardship of the company and its leadership.
‘Elon Musk has enjoyed substantial subsidies from California, amounting to over $3.2 billion while threatening to relocate his operations, including his headquarters, from California to Texas citing his bigoted beliefs against Californian’s safeguards and protections of our transgender community.’
She added:
‘Elon Musk is hopping about the country, spewing and tweeting political falsehoods and attacking FEMA while claiming his desire to help the hurricane victims with free Starlink access to the internet. But this claim, in itself, to the public benefit is a falsehood because one must first purchase the Starlink start-up kit for several hundred dollars and then face a monthly fee of $120 after 30 days of free internet.’
She accused Musk of grifting Hurricane Helene victims, calling it a ‘sick ploy to gain customers that are facing tremendous burdens and hardship’.
Government shouldn’t be doing the bidding or work on behalf of SpaceX, Newsom demanded, applauding moves to hold the company more accountable.
‘I caution us,’ Newsom concluded that ‘it appears that rather than prioritising the welfare of SpaceX employees, and the environment, the focus has been on profit maximisation’ at the expense of people.
Firing back, Elon Musk answered the accusations, stating on X, that the CCC’s political interference was:
‘Incredibly inappropriate. What I post on this platform has nothing to do with a ‘coastal commission’ in California!’
He then indicated a lawsuit, saying, he would be ‘filing suit against them on Tuesday for violating the First Amendment’.
Incredibly inappropriate. What I post on this platform has nothing to do with a “coastal commission” in California!
Filing suit against them on Monday for violating the First Amendment. https://t.co/bDgFPTdNal
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 13, 2024
Put simply, overbearing bureaucrats in California have blocked SpaceX in order to protect trans-rights, and stop Trump.
That’s the California Coastal Commission’s justifications for ruling against Elon Musk, in sum.
This article was first published on Caldron Pool
