January 17, 2004
ROCKET BOY:
To Boldly Go: Space exploration is cool, and deficit moaners are nerds. (HOMER HICKAM, January 17, 2004, Wall Street Journal)
All I've got to say is please, for pity's sake, stop worrying about NASA stealing money from your favorite federal program and adding to the deficit. Out of a $2 trillion-plus budget in 2004, human resources programs (Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Social Security, etc.) will get an astounding 34%! In contrast, NASA has the smallest budget of all the major agencies in the federal government. In fact, its budget has represented less than 1% of the total budget each year since 1977 and it will probably never get more than a fraction above that, even with this new plan.Before they complain about it, I wish the moaners would take the time to find out a few things about NASA's measly 1%. It has added billions of dollars back to our economy. It's about the only program in the federal budget that has a track record of doing that. When NASA does cutting-edge work, new products are devised and people, Americans, are put to work producing them. To keep our economy steaming and pay our bills, we have to stay ahead in product innovation. That means inventing and manufacturing new products. One proven way to do that is to get the space program going with some real work. [...]
If the president's space proposals seem overly bold, it's because no president has ever thought it important enough to spend any political capital to see a cogent plan in space all the way through. I don't agree with President Bush about everything but he's starting to remind me of Harry S. Truman. He gets with the program. You can argue with him about what he does and you might even be right, but you can't fault the man for getting out front and leading.
That is, after all, what we hire our presidents to do.
Mr. Hickam's own story is a reminder of why we should be pushing forward in space, because it lifts our gaze from the mundane and fuels the imagination.
MORE:
Beyond the Moon: Inside Bush's space plan (Frank Sietzen Jr. and Keith L. Cowing, 1/16/2004, United Press International)
On the afternoon of Dec. 19, the space planners held their final meeting with President Bush. The plan itself had been developed as the result of a methodical march towards consensus. So many people had become involved that the meeting required a larger room than normal.Posted by Orrin Judd at January 17, 2004 2:05 PMThose attending included Bush, Cheney, McClellan, the president's political adviser Karl Rove, Card and his special assistant Joel Kaplan, the president's science adviser John Marburger, Steve Hadley and Sean O'Keefe.
Rove had not been a big supporter of the idea and maintained a cautious attitude, although he did not criticize it. His silence was interpreted as support.
The plan called for granting NASA an immediate -- though relatively modest -- budget increase, as well as an additional boost spread over several years. As Bush looked at the numbers, the others wondered if he would agree to them, given that only two other agencies -- the departments of Defense and Homeland Security -- were marked for increases in fiscal year 2005. Would the president agree and put his political capital behind the plan?
As the discussions moved toward a final choice -- the moon and then perhaps onward -- Bush turned to Cheney. "This is more than just the Moon, isn't it?" he asked.
Bush said he saw the policy as being more than picking a destination in space and then going there. Rather, it was more about going out into the solar system to accomplish a broader set of objectives. It also should put to rest, once and for all, the decades-old and somewhat tired argument that space exploration was best performed by robots, not people. The new policy should embrace an intermix of human and robotic missions -- all focused toward a common goal of exploration.
Then the vice president spoke up: "Then this is really about going to these other destinations, isn't it?" he asked. All agreed. One other item emerged: the president expressed a preference for inviting other nations to participate in the effort. Agreed on all the major points, Bush ended the discussion. "Let's do it," he said.
I could not agree more, and in fact, I probably agree more than 99% of Americans.
I believe that the entire space programme, of which NASA would be only a part of, should have a budget of approximately $ 30 billion/year.
I've shoveled $ 5,000 a year into Social Security, and not only do I not expect to get dime one back, I fully expect to be helping to support my parents in the future.
All I ask in return, is the above.
And a kick-spleen military.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at January 17, 2004 9:53 PMMr.Judd;
Hickam's generation was inspired by a government program because government was held in respect. Given the common attitude toward government today, it's not clear that such a program will be a net positive inspiration.
The most telling point here is the 5 year plans for space travel. That's not how any previous success in this area has been done. But this time, this time, we can plan the future!
AOG:
True, it's unlikely that we'll meet the timetable, but without a yardstick, how will we know if we're reaching our goals ?
In fact, that was the point of the whole article: The Bush admin was asked by both Congress and NASA to set a clear goal, and define the methods to be used to achieve it. It seems logical that a timetable would be included in the package.
Further, many, many missions have natural deadlines, as the object to be studied reaches its closest point to the Earth. We've managed to meet most of those timetables.
Posted by: THX 1138 at January 18, 2004 4:55 AMAOG:
No one cares that it's a government program, except the fringe that thinks corporations would take us to space if only we'd get government out of the business. (Which raises the question: Why didn't UPS and FedEx have to wait for the Postal Service to be closed?)
NPR talked to a bunch of kids the day the anbnouncement was made and every single one was excited about the idea.
Posted by: oj at January 18, 2004 10:29 AM