Last week, after several weather delays, the Deep Space Climate Observatory launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla. The rocket carrying DSCOVR, the Falcon 9, was built by SpaceX, a private aerospace company that has quickly become one of the top companies lobbying NASA over the last 10 years.

The observatory will monitor space weather — like solar flares that could wipe out energy grids and infrastructure — from an orbiting distance of 930,000 miles from Earth, or roughly four times farther than the moon.

NASA’s share of the overall federal budget is, relatively speaking, pretty small. But clearly companies like SpaceX see potential. Last week, the House re-approved the agency’s 2015 budget, increasing its limit by $540 million to reach $18 billion total. Early this month President Obama requested an $18.5 billion budget for 2016. The agency plans on asking for funding increases at least into 2020, when it expects to request $19.6 billion.

Long-term, the goal is to get people to Mars. Short-term, the agency wants to bring the capability to launch astronauts out of Earth’s atmosphere back stateside. American astronauts have launched from Russia since the end of the Shuttle program in 2011. The new effort, the Commercial Crew Program, brought $6.8 billion worth of contracts last fall to SpaceX and Boeing, another big source of NASA lobbying. (The comparatively small 2012 contract to build the Falcon 9, worth $97 million, was technically awarded by the Air Force, one of three governmental agencies — along with NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — involved in DSCOVR.)

SpaceX is getting these big contracts — and many others — even as it has steadily increased its spending on lobbying. It is a sustained effort that appears to be paying off, though a spokesperson for SpaceX said that, given the massive lobbying of legacy aerospace companies, its success stems from other factors.

“SpaceX wins contracts because of our track record of 100% primary mission success and our ability to offer reliable launch services at a fraction of historic costs,” said spokesperson Emily Shanklin in an email. “Our advocacy efforts seek to bring competition to U.S. government space programs…These efforts do not generate contracts for SpaceX; rather they seek to create a level playing field where the best provider, regardless of who that might be, wins.”

Help us keep government accountable by making a donation today.

Whatever the reason, the company has increased its spending on lobbying more than 4,000 percent since 2003, when it dipped its toe in the influence pool with a $36,000 expenditure. By 2014, the firm’s investment in Washington advocacy had risen to $1.5 million, a high point — so far.

The only company that lobbied NASA more in 2014 (as measured by how many times the agency was specified in lobbying reports) was Arianespace, a French commercial launch provider; the company mentioned NASA 12 times in its reports.

Tied for second place with SpaceX were Lockheed Martin; MacDonald, Dettwiler, & Associates (a satellite company); and United Launch Alliance (a joint venture of Lockheed and Boeing). Each mentioned NASA eight times in their 2014 reports.

SpaceX has also been upping its political giving. In the 2004 election cycle, the first one in which CRP has data for the company, donations by SpaceX-affiliated individuals topped out at $25,500, with roughly equal amounts going to Democrats and Republicans. It started a PAC in 2005. In the 2014 cycle, the company’s employees and its PAC gave a total of $379,450 to federal politics, including $192,300 to candidates from its PAC, with a slight preference for Republicans, and $61,600 to candidates from company employees, who preferred Democrats.

The top recipient of SpaceX money in 2014 was Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who got $17,900. Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) came in second with $16,400. Ruppersberger fought to maintain the now-scrapped Constellation mission — which would have put Americans on the moon again.



For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: [email protected]





Support Accountability Journalism At OpenSecrets.org we offer in-depth, money-in-politics stories in the public interest. Whether you’re reading about 2020 presidential fundraising, conflicts of interest or “dark money” influence, we produce this content with a small, but dedicated team. Every donation we receive from users like you goes directly into promoting high-quality data analysis and investigative journalism that you can trust.Please support our work and keep this resource free. Thank you. Support OpenSecrets ➜