November 29, 2005
Personal Space
By Karl-Thomas Musselman
When I became politically aware, I didn't realize for some time that my views as a Democrat about space exploration were out of sync with what many Democrats feel is a big waste of time and, well, space. That may be in part to the fact that my prior interests before politics were to work for NASA. (My thoughts- if Armstrong is the first man on the moon, then obviously a Musselman should be the first man on Mars)
I was glad to read and now pass on an article written by Jeff Brooks, who was policy director for the Kelly White campaign last year, about why Democrats should support space explorations. So explore it if you will.
Posted by Karl-Thomas Musselman at November 29, 2005 11:16 AM
| TrackBack
He makes a good point that we Dems need to put forth our own vision for a space policy rather than just critiquing the Bush's. Bush has certainly left plenty of room for more practicable proposals.
If there's ever a Democrats for Space exploration caucus, sign me up. I'm all for most anything that furthers scientific study and the advancement of technology - whether it be stem cell research towards finding cures for diseases, towards alternative energy solutions, towards computer chips that are smaller, smarter and more powerful, or towards exploring the final frontiers of our planet (the oceans, Antartica, etc.) and those beyond.
I always thought space exploration should be a no brainer for Democrats. Most of what NASA does is basic research (or amounts to basic research, in that it examines big problems that may not have intuitive application outside of NASA), which is of enormous long term importance but gets short shrift in the private sector because of its limited short term commercial application. Government support for basic research has always been anathema to many on the Right, but many Democrats have understood that government can play a pivotal and effective role in overcoming the market's limitations with respect to such research.
Politically, Democrats should also be reminding Republicans that it's government-sponsored research that has given the US its huge lead in genetics, provided the knowledge underlying all of our advanced weapons systems, gave us the Internet and GPS, allowed us to demolish the Soviets in terms of computer and biotechnology, and some argue, win the Cold War.
I agree, and not only because of the "Galileo" episode of West Wing. Approximately five times the money that is spent on NASA helps develop new technology and research for the government -- that is, the U.S. economy gets $5 in economic investment for every $1 spent on NASA funding. That's what I understand, anyway -- someone is welcome to correct me. But that alone, it seems, is reason to keep funding NASA -- without getting into the whole "continued exploration" rhetoric that I firmly believe in, but has little practical application for an economy that is low on cash.
