OpEd:
In Support Of Additional Funding For NASA
September 28, 2009 by Kyle BradyTags: America, Congress, Exploration, NASA, Politics, R&D, Science, Space
As required by the FTC, a Full Disclosure is available - this piece adheres to the Code of Ethics
NASA exists at the very core of the worldwide science experience, and yet it faces budgetary and bureaucratic constraints that effectively prevent the agency from achieving its goals in a full and timely manner. Even while discussions of its future persist at the Federal level, not the least of which is the fundamental and questionable viability of the Constellation program, NASA continues to make unprecedented gains in all manners of science: data on the state of Earth’s glaciers has been retrieved through NASA’s ICESat, water has likely been found on Mars via a NASA orbiter, and water has also been found on the Moon courtesy of an instrument on an Indian lunar probe – not to mention the countless payloads of commercial, government, and private equipment launched into orbit by NASA on a regular basis.
Why, then, is Congress so reluctant to fund NASA appropriately?
While the proposed $17.7 billion budget for 2010 seems as if it should be more than sufficient, consider that the recent relocation of the space shuttle from California to Florida cost an estimated $2 million – but the adjusted budget of NASA during the 1960's, an era of less scientific importance and technological complexity, was almost double that of modern times. In addition to its manned spaceflight program, with an estimated pricetag of $5 billion, NASA also allocates resources to the International Space Station, the robotic-for-now exploration of the solar system and beyond, scientific instruments like the Hubble Space Telescope, various research and development endeavors, and considerably more.
As an agency that is historically over-tasked and under-funded, the last few years have not assisted in alleviating any pressure: NASA is now looking at returning to the Moon, establishing a “moonbase”, and proceeding to Mars, all tentatively accomplished within the next fifty years. But a larger budget shouldn’t be necessary, according to many Congressmen, because they cannot see the direct benefits to the American people.
Perhaps Congress, along with the rest of America and the world-at-large, should be reminded of what practical purpose NASA has for the average person: GPS, microwaves, satellite communication, CAD tools, medical imaging techniques, special fabrics used in various fields, plastics, and substantially more are all direct results of NASA research and development programs. These breakthroughs exist as practical, everyday items that an average individual uses, but such a list is entirely ignorant of the extensive research being done on extraterrestrial life, the nature of space-time itself, and various other groundbreaking arenas.
The human race would be exploring, and likely colonizing, the galaxy at this very moment, if it were not for the scientific breakdown seen during the Dark Ages – at least according to most scientists, technologists, and space enthusiasts. But regardless of whether this axiom is true or not, the message relates well to the modern predicament of NASA: how can significant progress continue to be made by the agency without funding proportional to their goals, mandates, and hopes? The era of space exploration and investigation is more important now than ever, despite the inability of many within government to understand why.
Without a funding increase that amounts to more than a small pittance, NASA can not and will not live up to the expectations of those in power, which will then be used as a excuse to further choke the final frontier of the United States. There is hope, however, among those which would be expected most likely to oppose the support of NASA, and the growth of the Federal Government by extension: Southern Republicans. Between the Democratic Congressmen that believe in the pursuit of knowledge and the Republicans that wish to fill the pockets of their financiers, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration may very well live to see a day of significant budget increases – ideally closer to that seen in the 1960’s than in recent years.
The future of science, the military, and humanity itself could easily depend on the financial strengths of the go-to agency for science, space, and experimentation. It would therefore seem to be in the best interest of the United States Congress to fund them properly, along with all related and necessary endeavors.
Kyle can be found on Twitter and MySpace, or reached via email.
