Federal budget choices are usually a tradeoff. We sacrifice one program in order to fund something else, often leaving behind a program that has a clear and important impact on society and our quality of life. Is it possible to fund ALL of the things our legislators propose? Of course not, but when the choice is between fighting crime, NASA's manned Space Program, or a tax cut to the millionaires of our country, I begin to feel outraged at the unfairness of the process.
Anyone who has read my past posts knows that I'm an enthusiastic supporter NASA and the manned space program, but what you may not know is how conflicted I'm feeling about what our country is sacrificing in order to pursue this noble effort.
I never had much use for our current President and until six months ago, couldn't say a good word about him. Late last year I decided to finally do something about my deep belief that the USA really needs to get off its collective asses, look beyond tomorrow's fat-filled dinner of pizza and beer, and restart the space program in a serious way. I think it was The Endless Frontier series of books edited by Jerry Pournelle that finally pushed me over the edge, so I started looking at where we were, and what I could do to help.
I joined The National Space Society, read hundreds of articles about the status of our research efforts, and the dismal state of affairs of the Space Program. This was just after GWB had been reelected, and although I had ignored it upon publication, believing that it was pure election year pandering, I finally read our President's Feb. 2004 proposal "A Renewed Spirit Of Discovery" and then the multi-million dollar report "The President's Vision for Space Exploration" (a .pdf that contains some eye-popping photo collages) and I thought,
"That's just great. Nice vision, but no money for it. What a fake, what a jerk"
In other words, the old bait and switch. The funding for this "vision" was to come from retiring the Space Shuttle, nothing more (look at the graphs). But still, I had some hope and decided to look a bit further. I spent a lot of time on the NASA website checking out some of the great robotic missions we have going, and got pretty damned excited about Cassini-Huygens, Mars Rover, Gravity Probe-B, and Deep Impact missions. Lots of great research, amazing new photographs of our neighbors in the solar system, and some extraordinary ground breaking science.
Article comments
1 - Aaman
Every generation must choose to allocate its resources - people, economic and technical - based on the priorities of the time. The security threats make the spending on security services seem critical, unless placed against the need to continue scientific research.
Nice, introspective post - and interesting arguments on the topic
2 - Victor Plenty
Space development is a chance to increase the resources our society has at its disposal.
In some cases, such as energy production, it is guaranteed to vastly increase our resources far beyond anything that will ever become available to us if we remain confined to this one planet.
The sooner we do this, the better off we will be, and future generations will thank us for it.
3 - Bennett
Thanks Aaman and Victor. I agree with both of your points. I never lost sight of these things, it just seemed so wrong that the folks that are championing the programs I find most important are the same men I want so badly to disappear from the national scene.
Ironic, eh? But it did inspire this diatribe.
Thanks again for the comments!
4 - Guest
Did you think NASA has been funded in the past all by itself? If you were so fond of NASA in the past, you must not have realized that it competed for funds against veterans health care and the elderly -- but that's exactly where NASA was in the funding process (the VA/HUD Subcommittee). The floor debates EVERY YEAR until this one (the first year the committee structure changed in Congress) was about inadequate funding for veterans and housing.
Funding choices are required in every aspect of our nation's budget, and we can all find tough choices among programs we like and support. I for one believe the fractional funds spent on space exploration are worth it (less than 1% of the federal budget), and I say that with many friends in state and local law enforcement.
5 - Eric Olsen
very well-done Bennett the personal reflecting on both the issue at hand and the general process of how such decisions are made - thanks!
6 - Bennett
"Did you think NASA has been funded in the past all by itself?"
Guest - No, of course not, but until recently I had never delved into the process of appropriations committees. I knew that different programs competed somehow, but frankly I am not sure why a set amount is given to a committee to divide up among such different programs.
Veterans vs NASA? Health care vs Highways? Amtrack vs Anthrax research?
How did we get here anyway?
When I first read the transcripts I thought there was a connection between the reduced funding and methamphetamine labs, and for a few hours my headline was
The Moon, Mars, and Meth.
That would have been so cool!
Thanks for the good word Eric!!!