Magnayon 1

Ronald Magnayon
Prof. Sotirakopulos
English 1102
13 May 2016
NASAs Lost Potential
NASA has always been a crucial part of the United Statess advancements towards better
technology. Since its foundation in 1958, it has been able to produce many useful and
revolutionary technologies that completely changed how our society today lives by. NASAs
contribution in producing ever advancing technologies has allowed humanity to be able to live
comfortably. NASA also gave the United States a sense of pride in being able to achieve what
was thought nearly impossible, especially during the Space Race. Being the only country to send
humans to the moon, the United States and NASA earned the respect of many other nations in
achieving this task. During Space Race Era, NASA was able to unite the country as they
watched their fellow countrymen travel to another world. Unfortunately, NASAs funding has
steadily decreased over the decades and it has been very limited in what it is able to do. Always
being plagued by budget cuts and not having enough funding to do certain missions, NASA has
not been able to run at its full potential. With NASAs budget being less than 1% of the national
budget in 2015 (National Aeronautics), it would greatly benefit NASA and the United States as a
whole if NASA had the funding close to what it had during the Space Race. If that is not
possible, at the very least, bring NASAs funding to over a percent of the national budget by
redirecting some funding. This will enable NASA to once again be on the forefront in
developing new technology and lead the way to a better tomorrow.
With NASA planning to accomplish new historic mission such as; the creation of a new
rocket system, the Space Launch System, the capture of an asteroid into orbit, and the first
manned landing to Mars, the only factor that can delay or even prohibit these milestones is

Magnayon 2

funding. Funding is the major contributor in the success of any program. NASAs budget in
2015 was around $19 billion (National Aeronautics). With this budget, NASA is only able to do
so much compared to what it wants to accomplish. Without the necessary funding, a program
cannot accomplish what it wants to do even if the results are beneficial. With NASAs budget
lacking in the past decade, it had to resort to letting private corporations like SpaceX and Orbital
ATK to do the heavy lifting for transporting supplies to the International Space Station. This was
not the case during the Space Race where NASA was one of the few that were able to send
astronauts and satellites to Low-Earth orbit. With proper funding, NASA would be able to
finally be able to finish the Space Launch System, a rocket system that will be widely used by
NASA since the Space Shuttles. This will limit NASAs dependencies on private corporations.
At its smallest configuration called SLS Block 1, it will provide 15% more thrust than the Saturn
V and will be able to carry three times more mass the the space shuttles (Space Launch
System). The SLS will boost the productivity of space missions both in low earth orbit and also
in deep space. This will in turn help enable NASA to find discoveries learned from the heavens
and apply it for us humans on earth.
With all of the possible benefits of investing in NASA, many are opposed in giving
NASA more funding. NASA is has been accused for misusing taxpayer dollars in the past. In
one M.I.T. newspaper article written by Keith Yost, he explains that NASAs successes are not
enough to cover the expenses that it spends every year. In the article he states, Think about it
this way: MIT, from a mixture of tuition, government funding, and endowment payouts, spends
$2.5 billion to keep itself running. NASA costs more than $17 billion. Over the past four
decades, instead of NASA, we could have had at least six additional MITsFor all the gains
that NASA has made, its opportunity costs are far greater (Yost). While this claim may seem to

Magnayon 3

make sense to some, it is far from being true. In the article written by Mike Wall from
Space.com, NASA is said to have over 1,723 inventions that has been passed down to general
use by the public (Wall). These are only the ones that were accounted for. Some examples of
technologies and inventions that NASA has created are: memory foam, better aircraft wing
designs, UV protection sunglasses, and GPS. With Walls article, it alone disproves Yosts claim
that NASA is not cost effective. A very important technology that was created at NASA is the
Magnetic Resonance Imager or MRI. An MRI is a very useful machine that is able to take
images of the human body without opening the body itself. It is one of the most important
machines used in the medical field today.
NASA was able to make discovery when researching algae. It was able to find a nutrient
in algae thought to only exist in human breast milk. Since then, this nutrient is now found in
95% of all infant formula in the United States (Wall). Wall reported that there were over 1,400
new technologies in just one year alone but were not recorded from an interview he conducted on
Daniel Lockney, the program executive in technology transfer and spinoff partnerships at the
NASA headquarters in Washington D.C. (Wall). There are so many more of these NASA
Spinoffs, and many more will surely come in the future. These technologies, changed the way
many live today. Not only are they useful, many are lifesavers and completely overhauled
different fields other than the field it was originally researched or created for. We would be
living in a very different place today if not for NASA.
With NASAs potential lost because of the small funding it receives, it will greatly benefit
the program and the country as a whole if the budget was at least 3% of the national budget.
This will enable NASA to have the funding it will need without having to worry about cutting
budgets and missions because of the lack of funding. At its height in 1966, NASAs budget was

Magnayon 4

around 4.41% (Historical Tables). This was NASA at its most productive state during the
Space Race. It was able to keep up and eventually surpass the Soviet Union and the United
Stated was put on the pedestal for being the most capable of reaching the heavens. Now NASAs
budget is at an underwhelming .6% of the national budget (National Aeronautics), and NASA is
barely able to provide funding for some of its research. Many missions and research have been
massively delayed and/or terminated completely because the funding had had to be focused
elsewhere. Private corporations have taken over certain aspects of the space industry that NASA
used to solely do before. Chinas space program is also catching up to NASA in that they are
also planning to send missions to Mars in the near future. NASA has fallen behind the great lead
it used to have in the Space Race. Funding will definitely boost NASAs capacity. While it
would be great if NASAs budget came back to where it was in 1966, around 3% would be more
than sufficient enough to keep NASAs agenda full and without terminated and delayed missions
given that this will be almost five times the current budget. With this budget NASAs research
will also flourish allowing new and improved technologies for space, civilian, and military uses.
This will help NASA take the lead again in space technology and once again be the pride of the
United States.
Coming up with two and a half more percent to redirect towards NASA is certainly no
easy task. At the minimum, doubling the budget it currently has to around at least 1% will
enable NASA to cover its expenses every year, but it will still lack in the research department in
producing newer and more useful technologies. Private corporations will most likely still be
needed since they are still the cheapest way at launching payloads to orbit. Surely doubling the
the NASAs budget will be the bare minimum so that the program will be able to make it each
year with minimal budget cuts. A way of acquiring the half of the percent to double the budget

Magnayon 5

would be by redirecting some of the defense budget into the NASA budget. With the defense
spending at a staggering 16% of the national budget (Historical Tables), redirecting half a
percent from it would be the most logical option. While not involved in a full war, the U.S.
should be able expend some of the defense budget towards NASA to raise its budget to at least
3% or at the very minimum over 1%. In a survey I conducted of around 21 participants, 6 people
wanted to increase the defense budget, 3 wanted it to be the same, 2 did not care, and 10 wanted
it to be less (Magnayon). With only having two weeks to conduct this survey and a limited way
to distribute it to the public, I understand that this is a very small survey. Two weeks may not
have been enough to fully utilize the survey. In addition, my only way of distributing the survey
was posting it on social media. This was what became of the results however and is what my
data consists of. In the survey, there are a good portion of the participants, around 47.62%, who
wanted to lower the defense budget (Magnayon). Surely there are many more people who agree
that the defense budget could be lowered and redirected to another department, preferably
NASAs.
NASAs achievements and discoveries paved the way of how us humans live today. The
creation of the MRI is only one of the many contributions NASA has been able to give to
humanity. Giving NASA the funding it needs will enable it to continue its work without
cancellations and delays. Helping NASA reach its full potential will not only benefit the United
States, but it will also benefit the entire world. Investing in NASA is definitely not a waste and it
will be on the forefront on the road to the future.

Magnayon 6

Works Cited
Historical Tables. whitehouse.gov. Office of Management and Budget. Web. 8 May 2016.
Magnayon, Ronald. NASA vs Defense. Survey. surveymonkey.com. SurveyMonkey. 15 Apr.
2016. Web. 8 May 2016.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. FY 2015 Agency Financial Report. Washington,
D.C. Web. 14 Apr. 2016.
Space Launch System. nasa.gov. 4 Feb, 2016. Web. 8 May 2016.
Wall, Mike. Space Tech in Everyday Life. Space.com. 31 Mar. 2011. Web. 8 May 2016.
Yost, Keith. Opinion: Should we cut NASA funding? The Tech 130.18 (2010): 1 Web. 8 May
2016.