NASA
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or NASA, was established in 1958 under the Eisenhower administration. Its main purpose was to act as an independent agency to direct the nation’s space missions and research programs. Over the past 45 years, since its inception, NASA has experienced many problems and has received recent negative publicity. NASA has had longstanding managerial problems on the inside and with outside contractors. They have also failed to estimate costs and have conducted projects well beyond what their budget dictates. An example of that would be with the failed X-33 project, among others. This analysis will explore these areas of NASA and provide preliminary recommendations as to how the program
…show more content…
Invoices submitted included personal costs related to private homes, jewelry, and vacations abroad. It was also uncovered that Omniplan was leasing buildings and equipment to itself by setting up phony companies. The outrageousness of the fraud in the programs is only matched by the huge bonuses that have been paid out to contractors for projects that have been grossly over budget. An example would be the Gamma Ray Observatory, which came in at forty million dollars over budget in 1993, and NASA gave them a five million dollar bonus just because it was a “huge technical feat”. Although the space program has many benefits for our society, past history tells us that serious controls need to be put in place to monitor the programs financials. The amount of waste that has occurred and potentially could occur in the future is unacceptable and puts the future of the program in jeopardy.
Publicity surrounding the fraud and waste in the NASA programs has forced the government to step back and revalidate the value of the space program. In 2001 the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001 established the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry. Their task was to assess the future of the U.S. aerospace industry and to recommend actions to be taken by the Federal Government to support the ability of the U.S. aerospace industry to
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
In the past 50 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has sent out many planned space exploration missions which have lead to numerous advantages in society and culture. NASA’s technologies benefit American lives with the innumerable important breakthroughs by creating new markets that have spurred the economy and changed countless lives in many ways. NASA is a federal agency and receives its fundings from the annual federal budget passed by the United States Congress. However, there are conflicting opinions that consider whether or not funding for NASA is a waste of government spending.
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.
Although it is true that there is no concrete outcome “for using taxpayer money” to fund space programs, it does not mean in any way that the money is not being used to help our society grow (Source H). The bulk of the money funded to space exploration goes towards the incomes of thousands of skilled employees who create such successful space missions. It can be assumed that less than one percent is being used from the federal dollar on manned space programs, as space exploration falls under the “All others” category which spends six percent of every federal tax dollar (Source C). Space exploration programs have the potential to discover new technologies and expand on what we have here on Earth, but in order to succeed, there needs to be slight altercations with how each federal tax dollar is spent. National defense gets nineteen percent of each federal tax dollar – a proportion that is too extraordinary considering the United States has access to a nuclear arsenal which is far less expensive and just as effective as maintaining conventional forces (Source C). The United States is pretty much the military for half the world, so instead of collecting all the money from our tax payers here in America, we should collect from other counties that we protect as
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.
Neil Armstrong 's 1969 lunar landing was one of humanity 's greatest accomplishments. Since then, we have found that an infinite supply of knowledge and resources await us just outside our atmosphere. Today, however, critics are beginning to argue more and more that the cost of space exploration is too high, and therefore new technological developments should be left to the private sector. Whether funded privately or by the government, funding of space exploration is imperative because NASA is essentially the only agency with the technological capabilities to support aircraft manufacturing, air safety and air transportation. Space exploration has also resulted in remarkable innovations that has played a key role in aeronautics research, preventative medicine, and allows scientists to study asteroids, along with other space debris and their impacts on Earth.
By using extensive internet based research, I plan to investigate the decrease in NASA’s funding. My primary question is; why is the U.S. government reducing the funds? and why are they saying they can't afford it?. When in reason I think they chose not to. I think NASA should be viewed as an investment, because it does not drain nearly enough money as it contributes. NASA pays for itself, they give us inventions that can apply to our daily lives, and with enough research we may be mining asteroids or pure limitless solar energy in the future, but most of all they give our species itself a way forward.
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.
President Ronald Reagan inherited the space policy of his predecessor, Jimmy Carter and was not satisfied with its current objectives and lack of direction (Logsdon, 1995). He put together a transition team to draft a new chapter for NASA which was left in an “untenable position” by Carter’s lack of direction for the agency. The NASA transition team leader, George Low, remarked that NASA can be “the best in American accomplishment and inspiration for all citizens” (Logsdon, 1995). The team provided input to Reagan that would drive space policy during his eight year tenure.
In July of 1958, President Eisenhower passed the National Aeronautics and Space Act, which established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration as a response to the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik nine months earlier. That administration, now known worldwide as NASA, has become an icon of space exploration and mankind's accomplishments. Who would have thought that fifty years later, NASA's future would be so uncertain? Congress has recently proposed a bill that would significantly cut funding from the NASA's Constellation program. These budget cuts are unnecessary and are counterproductive to the original idea of the space program.
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.
“Sputnik marked the beginning of the "space race," a period of nearly twenty years during which fierce US and Soviet competition spurred both countries to make rapid progress in aeronautic engineering,” (Lee). This period of time birthed a new program from the American government, called the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or NASA. NASA has been building rockets, training astronauts, and studying space for the benefit of science, the government, and the people of America since 1958. Unfortunately, many people don't realize how important NASA is, and there have been efforts made to stop the government from funding NASA. This program is essential for increasing knowledge of outer space, protecting planet Earth, and creating
The world today revolves around technology and is in an ever upward spiraling path of new advancements. This path is now at what some people call the “final frontier”, or the space age. The discoveries being made on this front are overwhelming in comparison to the technology that the world had only twenty years ago. Space exploration was once left up to the governments, as they battled to be the first country in space, but with national debts raising and the cuts made in response, space exploration is beginning to become new grounds for private business owners. Private companies are already beginning to send off rockets at a fraction of the cost that government does, but if more money was put into the government space program, then they
With that being said, we must re-evaluate the established paradigm that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) role in the Cold War. NASA did not exist for the sole purpose to beat the Soviet Union into space and establish a monopoly of power in space. This was a byproduct. NASA’s genesis was a genuine intention to increase the knowledge of mankind. In many ways NASA can be seen as a miracle of mankind because it was born out of a state of war, but evolved into an organization shaped for peace and discovery. By looking at NASA, it is an exemption from the warlike nature of the Cold War. We can observe this evolution from its wartime genesis, and its transition