2010: Space Odyssey

Some conservatives and Republicans have been decrying the Obama Administration's apparent decision to cut off funding to NASA's "return to the moon" program. Rand Simberg sets them straight: Obama's Conservative Space Policy

If the choice is between having no space program at all, and the current one, perhaps the latter is preferable. But if the choice is spending the taxpayers’ money to create wealth and new industries while actually accomplishing things in space and perhaps finally opening it up for the rest of us, versus a wasteful jobs program for Marshall Spaceflight Center, I know which I’d prefer. The new administration plans will take us much more in that direction, and on the rare occasion that it gets something right, true conservatives should be applauding it, rather than recycling hoary tropes about “staying close to home,” and “going nowhere.” Sadly, it was the misbegotten policy of the previous administration that was doing that. At least in this area, it’s change I can believe in.

As Simberg notes, for many people in and out of government NASA = Space. But, it really doesn't have to be that way. Simberg's preference is not for NASA to monopolize space travel, but to allow private entities to take the lead. There is no real reason that NASA must be the only platform by which humans must go to the moon or to Mars. Right now, there are Senators from Alabama and Texas worrying about jobs. Hey, somewhere in NASA there must be guys who would kill for an opportunity to work on space travel on their own terms, rather than the hide-bound terms of the government. Instead of griping about "lost jobs" like some UAW loser, how about setting up a climate in your state that can keep those jobs in-state through private industry? There's a lot of opportunity here for those willing to grasp it.

At this point, NASA's glory days are way behind it. It is without question that we needed a determined government effort to jump-start the space race and develop the technology and infrastructure for space exploration. But, at this point, NASA 's ability to launch humans into space has plateaued, and even backslid. Because it's a government program, too much emphasis was placed on safety above all else, with NASA's famously risk adverse culture an inevitable result. If someone dies testing a rocket for Burt Rutan, he's a crazy dreamer; but if someone dies on the Shuttle, it's a national tragedy. This is no way to run a railroad, or explore the next frontier.