NASA Funding: Beyond the Stars

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is perhaps the most well known space agency in the world. Since its formation in 19581, it has pioneered in space science, yet is also renowned for its large budget. NASA has the highest budget of any space agency, $18.6 billion2 in 2015, the equivalent of every American paying $54 towards the agency3, meaning 0.14% of total GDP is spent on NASA3 . This money is spent on the ISS, sending astronauts, probes and satellites into space, astrophysics and planetary science research, maintaining and developing NASA’s space telescopes (the Wide Field Infrared Survey telescope searching for dark energy and exoplanets, the James Webb Space Telescope and the Hubble Space Telescope) and developing spacecraft2. Space exploration is an incredibly expensive process with one shuttle launch costing $450 million4 however NASA’s colossal budget benefits the USA greatly; the agency employs 18,000 people5 as astronauts, engineers, scientists and teachers and G. Scott Hubbard, former director of the NASA Ames Research Center estimates that every dollar spent on NASA returns $8 to the economy6.While this figure is an estimate, it demonstrates NASA’s worth and capacity for money making. NASA works on pioneering research and as its patents and licenses return to the US treasury, it

Americans love the idea of space and staring up at the stars. They are driven to explore and discover what man does not know, and the spirit of exploration inspires society to create and invest towards the possibility of changing the world. Nevertheless, Americans dislike paying higher taxes to fund these programs. Therefore, it makes sense to figure out new ways to expand the way NASA is funded. The

How would you like to explore a never-ending frontier filled with endless potential and possible benefits for humankind? When put this way, space exploration sounds like an enticing adventure. However, is it all that it’s chalked up to be? We’re here to answer that question. There’s a specific issue that we need to consider when referring to space exploration; should we continue to fund NASA? We acknowledge that some people may already have strong opinions on this, and we ask you to keep an open mind and try to avoid bias. After all, we’re discussing our future.

In this essay, President John F. Kennedy builds an argument to persuade his readers in investing in space exploration. Kennedy uses analogies and reasoning to build his argument towards investing in space exploration. Kennedy’s speech had a powerful impact on the decision whether to direct the resources of the United States toward the construction of a space program.

According to a pie chart called, “Federal Spending for United States - FY 2015” from the NASA Data Charts, the budget for space in 2015 is not a percentage significant enough to have its own section. Instead, it is a subsection of the heading Other Spendings, which is given 2% of the federal budget. Also, in the Neil deGrasse Tyson article, it is said that the American government only gives a 7/10 cent of a tax dollar to space exploration (Tyson 2). He gives a brilliant resolution by saying, “ I’d prefer that it were more, perhaps 2 cents on the dollar.” even though we used to “. . . peak NASA spending amounted to no more than 4 cents on the tax dollar”. One of the most important technological advance was the invention of the Hubble Space

While many people support funding NASA and agree with the organization’s goals, there a good number of people who do not. A common reason for this is that they believe that the space program should focus on discovering things that can benefit us immediately, not in the future. This is a valid argument because there

As President Eisenhower once stated, “Every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed” (qtd in DeGroot). According to Jerry DeGroot, a lecturer in the Department of Modern History at the University of St. Andrews and author of the widely acclaimed biography “Douglas Haig”, every year, the United States federal government funds the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with over $17 billion. When Keith Yost, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), was asked about government funding on NASA, he replied, “NASA is not only spending money, but also the sweat of our laborers, the genius of our scientists, and the hopes of our children.” As a powerhouse in the work industry, NASA is taking away from the remainder of the country. Before venturing off into space, the US needs to realize the importance of tackling the issues that lie before the citizens here on Earth. As Richard Truly, a retired Vice Admiral in the United States Navy, stated in agreement, “...I didn’t go to NASA for the United States to make international commitments that wouldn’t keep, to design space vehicles that will never be built (or will be then fail), or to make promises to the American people that will never be kept.” It would be in the best interest for the citizens of the United States federal government to cut NASA funding.

“The current spending is only 0.4% of the U.S. budget, in 2005 it was 0.7%. This is an important question, not just for me but for the entire concerned human race. Because the NASA program is a key to the defense of not only this country, but the planet and the humans that seclude in it. In addition, NASA has recently discovered signs of water on Mars, and I think this is a valid reason. Also, the NASA funding cuts take a toll by reducing its employment; in which it affects the economy significantly.

Develop a piece of persuasive writing for New Scientist magazine weighing up the benefits and costs of space missions like this one. Said another way, evaluate the need for space missions like this by considering the costs and benefits to society.

America’s funding for NASA during the space race in 1966 was 4.41% of the federal budget yet in modern times this expenditure has fallen to only 0.5% of the federal budget. One might ask why, but the greater question is why isn’t anything being done about this dearth of funding for NASA. America should once again fund the exploration of space with a renewed ferocity because of the various educational, economical, and technological benefits of having well-funded space agencies.

“One small step for man, one giant step for mankind” - Neil Armstrong. Humans have been fascinated by stars and planets from the beginning of time.The human race has made some amazing discoveries; from drawings on cave walls, to putting somebody in space. Discoveries in space include finding new planets, technology, and theories. In recent years, there have been less discoveries due to a cut in NASA’s budget. This is because instead of the money going to NASA, the money goes to other organizations. The U.S should increase NASA’s budget because it helps find planets that could support life, creates more everyday objects, and gives ideas of how the earth might end.

To support the ideas space exploration brings, one must look at where the people’s taxes are going and if these ideas are worth the financial trust the citizens put into their government. Source A explains where the taxes from salaries

The concept of space exploration was first introduced to the American public in 1961 when President John F. Kennedy famously stood before congress and vowed that America would put a man on the moon “within the decade.” With hopes of defeating the Soviet Union in the “Space Race” and gaining a leg-up in the Cold War, NASA funding reached its all-time high in 1965-1966 when about four percent of the federal budget was devoted to exploring space. Since then however, funding dedicated to exploring space has nose-dived to about one-half of a percent of the federal budget (Tyson), with plans to cut that figure by an additional $260 million in 2017 (cite NASA funding cuts). Experts in the space-sciences field argue that increased funding in space exploration would re-ignite the American economy and return America to the scientific prominence it was once known for, while, on the other end of the spectrum, naysayers suggest that exploring space is an economic sink-hole that the United States can no longer afford to deposit to given its own earth-bound troubles.

This conspicuous conclusion can be seen by looking at what NASA has done in the past compared to what it is doing now, by looking at other countries government funded space agencies, by looking at the successes of current day privately funded space programs, and by looking at a private space company that is currently doing extremely well.

Based on the researchers, “added congressional pressure on NASA's budget came in the form of earmarks defined as “congressional additions to the NASA budget request that reflect targeted Members' interests.”16According to the CAIB, the fiscal year 2002 budget had “a net total of $540 million in reductions to ongoing NASA programs” Not to mention, there were such a demand on accelerating flight schedule with limited funds and valuable resources. In addition, they was competing to build and maintain the International Space Station, with plans to support US. Russian cooperation; which was part of the former President Clinton budget. Overall, the NASA organization focus was to meet a deadline in order to regain credibility and support from Congress