Scott Gration reportedly tapped for top NASA post

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Retired Air Force major general Scott Gration has been asked to head NASA under President-elect Barack Obama, Space News and AFP are reporting. The news agencies each cite an unnamed source in pointing to Gration, an early Obama supporter who stumped for the candidate and gave military cred to the campaign.

Gration, who retired from the Air Force in 2006, voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 election, according to a 2007 Newsweek profile of him. He was reportedly won over by Sen. Obama during a 2006 congressional delegation to Africa; Gration was raised by missionary parents in the Congo. His stature in the campaign became such that he was selected to speak at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August, where he touted Obama's leadership qualities.

The media has been floating various potential picks for the space agency post. Last week we reported on the rumored consideration being given to former astronaut Charles Bolden, a veteran of four shuttle missions and a retired marine. Gration, who would be a relative newcomer to NASA, holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J., and a master's in national security studies from Georgetown University, according to his Air Force bio.

Gration portrait courtesy USAF

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe