Blythe for Congress Newsletter; Protecting NASA's Long-Term Viability

Op-Ed

Blythe for Congress Newsletter

Protecting NASA's Long-Term Viability

Greetings!

Interestingly, I received about six letters and e-mails in response to my Op-Ed in Florida Today about the proposed manned missions to Mars and the moon. As most of you know, my point was that, even though I am a huge fan of NASA, I have not seen justification for the concept of building a manned base on the moon. The majority of responses were very positive. I have lost some support, but I have gained some as well. I am trying to look at issues with a common sense approach. This is a touchy issue for many however, and some people have misunderstood my position and seem to think that I am anti-NASA. I would like to clarify my position in this newsletter.

Photo from Hubble Telescope

The Role of NASA

NASA is vitally important to our society for launching and maintaining weather satellites, intelligence-gathering satellites, navigational satellites (GPS), communications satellites, and satellites for earth science research - needed now more than ever for the study of global climate change. Their role in deep-space research is exciting - from the Hubble Telescope to the Chandra Radiotelescope, to the just-launched GLAST Mission (Gamma Ray Large Area Telescope). Our understanding of space has increased dramatically.

The use of robotics has vastly improved our ability to study our solar system. Complications in landing have doomed half of the missions to Mars - clearly until we have a better track record it would not be prudent to send live missions. We are just beginning to learn about the red planet - there is so much more we can do cheaply and safely with robotic missions over the next ten years!

Photo of Mars from Rover

No presidential candidate has expressed support for manned missions - Senator McCain said recently that he is "intrigued" by the idea of a manned mission. So are we all, and some day it will be appropriate.

Cost-Benefit of a Moon Base?

Some readers of my Op-Ed thought that I am anti-NASA because I questioned the cost and benefit of planning a manned base on the moon. I don't think that my concerns are unreasonable. Why would we plan such a venture? Are there resources to be gained, and if so, what are they and how will we access them? My opponent claims there are security reasons - but I personally will work hard to make sure that the US signs a verifiable space weapons treaty to keep weapons out of space! We do not need and cannot afford an arms race in space. The militarists claim that we "need to own the high ground" for security. Gee - China owns Mount Everest and that hasn't helped them strategically. Whether launching deep-space vehicles or gathering solar energy, most space goals can be done in low-earth orbit with the help of the International Space Station much more cheaply and much more easily. Many of those opposed to my conservative approach to a moon base claim that we can "build a base and spacecraft from resources on the moon". I guess we are going to have moon miners with pick and shovel, carting ore to the mill, with a train taking the ore to the moon smelter, and from there the sheets of metal will be shipped to the moon spacecraft fabrication factory. It sounds a little too Buck Rogers for me.

And in his Op-ed piece, Rancatore claims that "for every dollar spent thousands of new inventions are developed". Really - thousands for every dollar?

Let's go slow with this. We can explore the moon with robotics for now - we haven't even done that in decades, so let's launch an aggressive program of learning more about just what resources might be one the moon. There is need for many NASA engineers and scientists to continue all aspects of space research.

SAVING NASA

As a strong supporter of NASA, I am concerned about NASA getting into this situation again in the future. One of the problems with our government is that we plan and budget only for very short time periods. Large programs such as NASA, that develop progams lasting years or even decades, must have a long-term plan and budget. I will propose when I am elected that congress develops a rolling ten-year plan and budget for NASA, so that they always know where they stand ten years down the road.

Opportunity Cost

I thought today's juxtaposition in the Florida Today was interesting - Rancatore's Op-ed chastizing me and pushing for manned moon bases, and on the front page was a huge article about the number of hungry people in Brevard County and the country. Can't we try to lead the world in taking care of our people? Many claim that we can't let the Chinese get to the moon before we return. Why not? Ego? Why aren't we worried about being near the bottom of the world's list in public transportation, in environmental protection, in education, in providing health care? We need to look at our priorities, that's all... We can go to the moon once we have fixed this administrations messes with a war costing us trillions of dollars and an economy near collapse. Those are our real challenges.

Source