Tuesday, 19 February 2008

nasa budget buster or bargain_25



NASA: Budget Buster or Bargain?

We often hear the lament that we are over spending on NASA and that

cuts are thus necessitated. This is usually followed by lamentations

that we spend far too many resources on our space program in general.

Let us look at the real truth vs. the spin.

The first red flag in almost any discussion of the Federal budget is

the use of total dollars rather than percentage of budget. Have you

ever noticed how the NASA budget is always referred to in billions of

dollars and never as how much we allocate as a percentage of spending?

There is a reason for this approach. The dollar amount is always

perceived as excessive as almost any expenditure of our government

seems high when quoted in dollars. Framing spending as the percentage

of total spending is the only real measure of any allotment.

Further, the point is made to point to any and all NASA shortcomings

and or failures. The point being that we are wasting these billions of

dollars and getting absolutely little if any return. Do not fear, I'm

not about to tell you that NASA gave us Teflon, as that is irrelevant

and probably false. Sure, there have been many spin-offs that have

benefited our general society, but those are but inconsequential

benefits.

The first thing we need to look at is what did we spend on NASA during

the glory years of 1960 through 1969. What did we invest in the space

race to the moon? Below is the table showing this information. The

numbers are in thousands of dollars and have been rounded off.

Year

NASA Budget

Total Federal Expenditures

NASA Budget as % of Total Federal Expenditures

1960

401,033

76,539,412

0.5%

1961

744,308

81,515,167

0.9%

1962

1,257,047

87,786,766

1.4%

1963

2,552,035

92,589,764

2.8%

1964

4,170,997

97,684,374

4.3%

1965

5,092,904

96,506,904

5.3%

1966

5,932,630

106,917,396

5.5%

1967

5,425,815

172,442,136

3.1%

1968

4,723,783

194,032,346

2.4%

1969

4,252,749

206,618,289

2.1%

We can see that the highest spending came between 1963 and1967. This

also corresponds in our manned space program and the development ofthe

Gemini and Apollo spacecraft as well as larger boosters to lift the

larger payloads into orbit. Afterwards the spending returns to the

decade average of around 2.5% of the national budget.

Most people believe that the NASA budget remained approximately the

same right up to today. Let us examine the table below of the NASA

spending during the 1990's and see the truth. The numbers are in

millions of dollars and have been rounded off.

Year

NASA Budget

Total Federal Expenditures

NASA Budget as % of Total Federal Expenditures

1990

12,429

1,251,776

1.0%

1991

13,878

1,323,757

1.0%

1992

13,961

1,380,794

1.0%

1993

14,305

1,408,532

1.0%

1994

13,695

1,460,553

0.9%

1995

13,377

1,515,412

0.9%

1996

13,882

1,560,094

0.9%

1997

14,358

1,600,911

0.9%

1998

14,206

1,651,383

0.9%

1999

13,664

1,704,545

0.8%

Our space program is critical to the future of our country and the

world. The future of mankind is in the stars and the country that

establishes itself in this frontier will win far more than simple

bragging rights. Once any nation can establish sustainable colonies

elsewhere in space, they will no longer be contained by the

geopolitical realities and pressures here on Earth. This process will

be ongoing and the United States is not the only contender in this

race. Somehow I believe that investing up to 5% of our budget would

not be an excessive request. As we call on NASA to do more and conquer

space, we must also give NASA sufficient monetary resources to

accomplish that mission. When you speak of progress in a space

program, you get out of it proportionally what you put into it. Let us

at least make a marginal effort to fund our space program to an extent

where we can actually expect results, rather than cut the funding year

after year complaining that NASA does not meet expectations.

Expectations take money. All in all, I would contend that NASA has

been a bargain, but we can no longer try to get away with a space

program that is under funded for the expectations placed upon the

program.


No comments: