You are on page 1of 11

Is NASA worth the cost?

Running head: Is NASA worth the cost?

Is NASA worth the cost?


A Line of Inquiry
Connor Ray
James Madison University

Author Note
This Paper was prepared for Writing 103, Section 40, taught by Professor Fielding
Abstract

Is NASA worth the cost?

This paper explores the topic of the USAs space program and if NASA is
worth the cost. My reasoning for choosing this topic is that I have had an interest in
space and basically anything NASA has been doing since Middle School. I believe
that NASA servers as one of the world leaders in innovation and its creation
represents one of the most important parts of American History. NASA is important
because they have and continue to make technology that can be used in everyday
lives and are searching for a new planet to for humanity to live on once The Earth is
destroyed. NASA exploration into deep space is the next step in humanitys need to
explore. It started with Columbus sailing to the New World, Lewis and Clark
exploring the Louisiana territory, and ends with Humans exploring deep space.

Is NASA worth the cost?

3
IS NASA worth the cost?
A Line of Inquiry

Introduction
A quote from Professor Wernher von Braun says that The greatest gain from
space travel is the extension of our knowledge. In a hundred years this newly won
knowledge will pay huge and unexpected dividends. NASA is just as important as
any other part of the federal government and the quote from Professor von Braun
proves that. However, most people are starting to question NASAs worth since they
have not achieved something that could rival the importance of the Moon landing.
Without something that could rival the Moon landing, the public as almost all
interest in NASA plans and missions. People how oppose this plan say that NASA
future is important because of how much it impacts the industries that are not
involved in space travel and its gives humanity a backup plan in case the Earth ever
gets destroyed. NASA can be accredited for creating particle things such as memory
foam and Velcro to superconductors and transistors. The main question people keep
asking is whether or not NASA is worth the cost?
Summary of the Articles
The article NASAs Shuttle Program Cost $209 Billion-Was It Worth It?
written by Mike Wall discusses the success of the shuttle program. This is a new
article published by space.com. Out of the 134 flights, only two have ended in
tragedy. Each flight cost about $1.6 million dollars. It only took 12 years to reach the
Moon and after that the program barely left the Earths low-orbit. The budget has
been slowly cut over time, starting at $5.9 billion to eventually falling to less than
0.5% of the federal budget. Shuttles have created some benefits such as the Hubble

Is NASA worth the cost?

Space Station and the International Space Station giving NASA insights in numerous
scientific fields. The shuttle program did have some great accomplishments but it
simply lasted too long.
The article President Obamas NASA Budget Should Not Be Approved
written by George Landrith, much like the title suggests, discusses why President
Obama NASAs budget should not be approved. This article is a scholarly source
from the Frontiers of Freedom Institute. Instead of deep space flight, NASA is
focused on studying climate change on Earth. NASA not focusing on space travel is
the reason why it has in been losing public interest. Not funding NASA is research
deep space travel is like Queen Isabella turning down Christopher Columbus.
Exploration is an important part of humanity that cant be stopped. NASA should go
back to the big picture plans like traveling to the Moon and Mars. The longer it takes
to reinvest in NASA, the harder it will be to get back into space travel. Space travel
will also inspire kids to have an interest in space, sparking a new crop of people to
continue the advancements of NASA.
The To Infinity and Beyond?: More Wasteful Spending at NASA? written by
Peter Roff discusses about how wasteful NASA has been over the past years. The
article was originally published by U.S. News. The total federal debt is starting to
exceed the countrys GDP. One plan NASA as for the future is lassoing an asteroid
and bring it into Earths Orbit. If the economy was going strong, the space lasso
would be a good idea, but with this being tough economic times, the countrys
resources must be used more wisely. The Space Program under Kennedy and
Johnson did create a strong sense of national pride and spirt of adventure. Under
Obama, NASA is focused on Earthly matters instead of deep space missions. There

Is NASA worth the cost?

is not enough money to fund these efforts. Most of the money wasted on NASA are
tasks that could easily be accomplished by the private sector. Before the US
government starts explore deep space, we need to make sure everything that home
is in working order.

Comparison of Sources
On the question of NASA programs either running too long or spending in the
wrong places Landrith and Roff agree that NASA was misusing money and certain
programs were running too long. Landrith (2012) said NASA should be working to
keep the United States as the world leader in space exploration. There are billions of
dollars spent on climate research, and NASA doesn't need to duplicate those
efforts. NASA might be forced to spend money on other things to help build PR. It
can also be inferred that NASA is using its money on and why spending that money
is a waste. Roff (2013) said from studies of poultry genitalia to the Starbase Youth
Program which teaches science, technology, engineering, and math to at-risk
youth living near military bases located around the United States, a task that could
easily be taken up by a private sector that needs the trained work force. NASA
tends to lose track of its original goals for space travel and gets too focused on
problems on Earth that can be easily solved by other organizations. NASA has lost
track of its original goals causing a waste of money and a loss of interest from the
general public.

Is NASA worth the cost?

One the question of congress and politics have gotten in the way of NASAs
progress. Both Landrith and Roff agree. Landrith (2012 ) said

Obama's NASA administrator Charles Bolden revealed that one of President


Obama's primary missions for NASA was to "reach out to the Muslim world" to help
Islamic nations "feel good" about their contributions and accomplishments in the
scientific arena. NASA is being controlled by money, so if they want funding for
their other projects they must do whatever Congress wants then to do. NASA is also
being used as a political tool to help better relationships with the Middle East. Roff
(2013) said the current administration has relegated the once storied agency to
the job of making the Islamic world feel good about the many contributions it has
made to science and mathematics over the centuries . Instead of NASA being an
independent branch of the government, free from foreign policy. However, NASA is
now acting like a part of the state department. NASA is suffering from sets backs
due to President Obama getting to involved with NASAs day to day activities.
Bureaucratic red tape is getting in the way of NASA progress and prevent NASA
from achieving its goals.
On the question of is NASA success, both Wall and Landrith agree that NASA
was in most ways successful in its shuttle program. Landrith (2012) states Much of
the advancement and growth in the economy the past three decades have their
roots in the space program. Transistors, circuit boards, computerization and
miniaturization technologies were all advanced at unprecedented rates by the
space program, not to mention the marketability of Tang or Ziploc bags. NASA is
the source of multiple technologies that are beneficial for all of humanity. NASAs
innovations benefits the average human that has almost no interest in space as
much, if not more than a person that has a massive interest in space. Wall (2012)

Is NASA worth the cost?

said That out of the 134 flights in the shuttle program only two ended in tragedy
and the program ended up creating things like the Hubble Space Telescope and the
International Space Station. NASA not only creates practical technology; it has also
created several devices that have propelled scientific research for years. Both the
Hubble Space Telescope and the International Space Station have been symbols of
human progress for years. NASA have been successful in both emotional reasons
(continuing American Exploration) and scientific reasons (creation of the Hubble
Space Telescope).

Contrast of Sources
On the question of should NASA funding be cut, Roff agrees that
funding should be cut while Landrith claims that NASA funding should not be cut.
Roff (2013) states that If the government continues to spend money on NASAs
outlandish endeavors, there will be less money for improving infrastructure. NASA
budget is around 18 billion dollars a year and some people believe that is waste
money since certain parts of the countrys infrastructure are failing. NASA also has
not made any major progress in the mission to Mars, which causes doubt in NASA to
grow and NASA to lose a lot of public interest. Landrith (2012) says cutting NASA
would be a huge mistake and the longer the governments waits to reinvest in the
Space Program the harder it will be to get off of ground. If the government losses
all interest in the space program now, any momentum the program had will go
away. If the government tries to restart the program it will be extremely difficult.
Cutting NASA funding might be better for the short term problems, but cutting
NASAs budget would only cause more long term problems.

Is NASA worth the cost?

On the question of the worth of the space program, Landrith claims that
space exploration was worth it because it is the next step to American Exploration,
while Wall claims that space exploration is worth is because of all of the technical
innovations it creates. Landrith states The space exploration is worth the cost
because it is the next step in American Exploration. Not exploring space is like have
Lewis and Clark not explore the Louisiana territory, its just simply un-American.
Humans have a nature desire to explore wants around them, so when most of the
Earth is explored the next nature step in exploration would be space. Space
exploration also causes a huge spike in patriotism, making more about emotion and
pride than science. Wall (2012) claims Space exploration was worth it because of
the technical advancements it created such as the Hubble Space Telescope and
International Space Station. Hubble Space Telescope is by far one of the most
important telescopes ever created. The Telescope has allowed for humanities
knowledge

of

space

and

the

universe

to

expand

beyond

most

peoples

imaginations. This knowledge and new technology makes space exploration worth
it. NASA is worth the cost for many reasons. Reasons that include both science and
emotion.
On the question of is investing in the space program can be part of a
sustainable economy, Roff claims that the space programs help strengthen the
economy in some situations. On the other hand, Wall is unsure is the space program
helped the economy. Roff (2013) says Science and experimentation drives job
creation, produces economic growth and, to put it bluntly, can be really interesting.
The nation certainly profited from President Kennedy's vow to put a man on the
moon and return him safely to Earth within a decade. Like War, Space causes a
huge spike in patriotism, which in turn causes a huge spike in the economy. For the

Is NASA worth the cost?

government invests in NASA, the more money NASA gets, the more employees can
hire. Wall (2012) said Nixon thought all of the proposals were too expensive, so he
green-lighted just on aspect of them: the shuttle. Nixon didnt think the entire
space program would help sustain the economy, which why he only approved the
shuttle program. Parts of NASA are sustainable like the jobs it creates and other
parts, such as the shuttle costs, are unsustainable.
Evaluation of Sources
Article President Obamas NASA Budget Should Not Be Approved is
scholarly and provides good information about the topic question. However, the
author is extremely biased toward increase funding in NASA. The strengths of
Landriths article is his use of logos to make a convincing argument for why
President Obamas NASA budget should be rejected. The use of logos is show in
Landriths statement that much of the economy growth over the past three decades
can be contributed to the space program . The use of logos makes Landrith claims
more creditable, thus making his article more convincing. The article and I have the
same opinion that exploring is part of the American culture. Weakness in Landrith
article is that he is clearly biased towards NASA and barely provides the opposing
sides viewpoints. A different weakness is some of the logical fallacies in Landriths
paper. Once such fallacy is that he doesnt address the benefits of NASAs current
programs and thinks getting rid of the wasteful programs will automatically make
NASA great again.
Article To Infinity and Beyond?: More Wasteful Spending at NASA? is a good
source because it is an opposing viewpoint to Landriths article. The strengths of
Roffs article is that he makes a claim about NASA misuse of money and then backs

Is NASA worth the cost?

10

up that claim with ways the government could better spend that money. Doing this
makes the article flow extremely well, his logic extremely easily to understand, and
makes a convincing argument. I also argue with his claim that congress is getting in
the way of NASA by making them to PR projects. He backing of claims is shown in
the quote To boldly go where no man or woman has gone before, America must
first get its financial house in order. If the government continues to spend money on
such luxuries as the "Lasso an Asteroid" program, there will be less money available
for core functions. Roff makes a claim about wasting money and then shows how
theyre wasting money. Roff suffers from the same weakness as Landrith. Both are
extremely biased toward their view point and suffer from the same logical fallacy.
Thinking if NASA gets rid of the unnecessary projects, the rest of the programs will
improve. A different fallacy that Roff states is that is if NASA is cut, the money saved
will improve other areas of the country. He doesnt provide any stats that would help
back that claim.
NASAs Shuttle Program Cost $209 Billion-Was It Worth It? is a good source
because it provides a history of the shuttle program and is not biased. The strengths
of walls article are the use of logos to deliver information without sounding bias and
that his description of technological advancements created by NASA validates my
opinion that NASA is worth the cost. A weakness of the article is it very general and
really doesnt not take any topic in depth. This is allowing for a lot information to be
conveyed, but keeps all that information extremely general. With that info being
extremely general, it makes is difficult to draw any type of opinion from the article.
Conclusion

Is NASA worth the cost?

11

What I need from this line of inquiry is that the question of NASA worth is
much more complex than originally thought. I originally thought that NASA failure
were to blame because of a lack of money from Congress, but I learned parts of
NASAs failure can be contributed to both a lack of funding and a misuse of money. I
also learned that people can support the funding of NASA for both scientific and
nonscientific reasons. Learning that people could support NASA for nonscientific
reasons gave me a new way to think about the question. After thinking about it,
NASA seemed even more important. Some research needed to give me a more
complete understanding of this question would be about NASAs futures plans and a
more detailed history of NASAs struggle to get money.
References
Landrith, G. (2012). President Obama's NASA Budget Should Not Be Approved. In M.
Haerens (Ed.),

Opposing Viewpoints. NASA. Detroit: Greenhaven

Press. (Reprinted from Human Events, 2010, November 28)


Wall, M (2012, July 5). Space Exploration and Funding. Retrieved March 20, 2016
Roff, P. (2013, April 10). To Infinity and Beyond?: More Wasteful Spending at NASA

You might also like