Skfta da 1nc 1nc skfta da
Download 0.85 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Link: Unpopular with the Public
Constellation LinkNASA needs budget sustainability, which requires strong government support Carroll ’11 (Rebecca, National Journal, “As NASA Prepares to Retire Its Final Shuttle, Agency Leaders Face an Uncertain Future”, http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/as-nasa-prepares-to-retire-its-final-shuttle-agency-leaders-face-an-uncertain-future-20110602) NASA had been developing vehicles under its Constellation program to support Bush's vision for post-shuttle space exploration initially to the moon as a stepping stone to Mars. In 2010, President Obama called for the cancellation of Constellation, deeming the program too expensive and too far behind schedule. Legal and political knots held Constellation in limbo for months before it officially closed down this year. The cancellation was a major shift. More than $13 billion had been spent on Constellation as of April. (If dollars were years, that would be about the age of the universe.) The program also represented the agency's nearest-term human space flight plans. NASA's 2012 budget calls for money to invest in flight systems that would take humans beyond low-Earth orbit, including a deep-space capsule and heavy-lift rocket, and research to enable the long journeys. But near-term goals are scant in the budget request. Obama is recommending a slight increase for exploration, but much of it is slated to go toward partnerships with the commercial space industry to get cargo and crew to the international space station--part of the president's controversial push to privatize more of NASA's work. "This budget requires us to live within our means so we can invest in our future," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said when the 2012 request was released. "It maintains our commitment to human spaceflight and provides for strong programs to continue the outstanding science, aeronautics research, and education needed to win the future." Obama insisted last year that he is "100 percent committed to the mission of NASA and its future." He acknowledged a "sense that folks in Washington--driven less by vision than politics--have for years neglected NASA's mission and undermined the work of the professionals who fulfill it." And he observed that NASA's budget "has risen and fallen with the political winds." The exploration study notes that NASA's life and physical sciences program already was under pressure. In 1996, its budget was about $500 million, but in 2010, it was only $150 million, according to a draft of the report. "Researchers must have a reasonable level of confidence in the sustainability of research funding if they are expected to direct their laboratories, staff, and students on research relevant to space exploration," the draft says. It stresses the need for a coherent research plan that is given appropriate resources. "This is especially noteworthy in light of the frequent and large postponements that NASA's exploration-related goals have experienced over the past several decades." Obama faced disapproval from congress regarding reviving the Constellation program and the House cut down on space funding. Conley, 6/19/2010 Associate Professor Department of Political Science University of Florida and Wendy Whitman Cobb PhD Candidate University of Florida, , Richard S. “The Perils of Presidential Leadership on Space Policy: The Politics of Congressional Budgeting for NASA, 1958-2008” pg. 10-11 Interestingly, however, Obama has faced resistance in both chambers of Congress regarding his proposals to modify the Constellation program. In a compromise bill approved in the Senate for FY 2011, portions of that program were revived, in particular a crew capsule and new heavy lift vehicle. The bill also reduces the amount of money provided for commercial companies seeking to build a human-rated space vehicle. A bill currently under consideration in the House of Representatives reduces commercial funding even further, “and does not call for the development of a new heavy lift rocket but a modification of Constellation’s over-budget and technically troubled Ares I rocket” (Block 2010). Link: Unpopular with the PublicSpending on space unpopular with public despite support for space exploration Foust 7/24- senior analyst with the Futron Corporation, Space Politics (Jeff F. 7/24 "Polls suggest support for space exploration but not bigger budgets" http://www.spacepolitics.com/category/nasa/ )PHS The end of the shuttle program, in addition to prompting its share of political reactions, was also a cue for pollsters, who used the occasion to seek out the public’s views on a variety of space issues. The responses suggest the public, while generally supporting NASA, is reluctant to let the shuttle go and also not eager to give the agency more money. On the shuttle, Rasmussen Reports poll from mid-July found that 50% of respondents concluded the shuttle program was worth the expense to taxpayers, versus 27% who didn’t think it had been worth it. A CNN/ORC poll last week also found that half of respondents thought the end of the shuttle program would be “bad” for the US, versus a third who thought it would have no effect and 16% who thought it would be good. An Investor’s Business Daily (IBD)/TIPP poll from last week also found that 56% opposed ending the shuttle. There’s still interest in human spaceflight and space exploration in the post-shuttle era, though. The Rasmussen poll found that 74% thought it to be at least somewhat important for the US to have a human spaceflight program (73% also supported robotic space exploration), while the IBD/TIPP poll found that 65% thought the US should have a “leading” or “active” role in space exploration. The IBD/TIPP poll, though, noted that 72% didn’t believe the current administration has a “clear plan for space exploration”. The CNN/ORC poll reported that 64% of respondents believe it’s very or fairly important for the US to be ahead of other countries in space exploration, and 75% thought the US should develop its own crewed spacecraft. Those programs, though, will likely to have to be done with NASA budgets no greater than today’s. The IBD/TIPP poll reported that only 10% of respondents want to increase NASA’s budget; 49% want to keep it at current levels while 28% want to cut it (and an additional 8% want to see the budget cut entirely.) The Rasmussen results were only a little better for NASA advocates: it found 18% who wanted to increase spending on space exploration, versus 40% who want to keep it at current levels and 30% who want to spend less. There’s also some support for increased reliance on the private sector to support human spaceflight and exploration. The CNN/ORC poll noted that 54% thought that the US should rely more on private companies for human spaceflight, versus 38% who preferred the government. The IBD/TIPP poll found that 59% agreed that “the U.S. could get into space faster, better and more effectively if ‘we get the space program out of Washington and cut out the bureaucracy.’” The Rasmussen poll reported that 38% thought the government should fund “the space program” (without being more specific), while 33% thought that should be the responsibility of the private sector. As always, there are caveats with these polls: how the survey instrument (questionnaire) is worded can have a major effect on responses. And the language can also be imprecise: when people say, for example, that the private sector should fund the space program, are they referring to everything NASA does or the more visible elements, like human spaceflight? Combined, though, they suggest the public wants the US to remain a leader in space exploration, including human spaceflight; they’re just not willing to spend more money to do so. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.85 Mb. Share with your friends:
|