4 ms·

> There are many Democrats who feel that space exploration is a waste of money that would be better spent on social programs. That may be so, but I've never m

> There are many Democrats who feel that space exploration is a waste of money that would be better spent on social programs. That may be so, but I've never met one or heard from one. They would seem to me to be such a small minority I did not even know of their existence until today despite being both a democrat and a fan of space and science research. > And many Republicans that are very pro-NASA for bragging rights and national security implications if not other reasons. "For bragging rights?" But I'm talking about support for basic research and science in general. If they show support for NASA publicly for "bragging rights" but then vote party-line items on bills that hurt science research then they are not actually Pro-NASA or pro-science at all. I would even say that's true if they are not extremely vocal every single day about how bad most Republican policies are for science in general.

will4274 9y ago
> That may be so, but I've never met one or heard from one You've never heard Barack Obama speak on TV? http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/nasa-grieves-over-canceled-program http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science.... > "For bragging rights?" 1980/1990s Republicans were pro-NASA to the extent that it proved America was the best country in the world. At that time, Democrats were mostly anti-NASA, believing the money could be better spent on other things. Then, both parties underfunded NASA, but Democrats tended to underfund NASA more severely than Republicans. In the mid 2000s, as Republican opposition to global warming and evolution grew, Democrats became more mixed on NASA, as Republican opposition to NASA could be spun as part of a larger "Republicans are anti-science" narrative (a narrative that remains popular today). Simultaneously, Republican concerns about the deficit grew. Truth be told, the situation is not that different today than in the 80s and 90s. Twenty years ago, neither party funded NASA fully, but the Republicans were slightly more willing. Today, neither party will fund NASA fully, but the Democrats are slightly more willing. There are cynical reasons to think that greater willingness is political in both cases.
- jacobsheehy 9y ago
  > You've never heard Barack Obama speak on TV? Nope. Not about this anyway. > http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science. What's that supposed to mean? It does not show anything like Obama not supporting NASA, or being a Democrat who thinks space isn't a priority, or anything like that. Not sure what point that link is trying to make in this discussion.
- free652 9y ago
  >You've never heard Barack Obama speak on TV? What you're trying to prove? That Obama gave more money to NASA?
  - Alupis 9y ago
    FTA: > President Obama's 2011 budget request for NASA cut the agency's Constellation program completely, effectively canceling a five-year, $9 billion effort to build new Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets. It's always sort of a misnomer that the President sets the budget... they really only get to approve/reject what congress lays out (but take all the credit/blame). Of course a president can wish for certain things, and veto a proposed budget that doesn't meet their political goals, but ultimately it's congress that sets the budget. If I recall, it was the 2016/2017 budget proposal under Speaker Paul Ryan that sought dramatic increases in the NASA budget.
    - Retric 9y ago
      He supported increasing NASA's overall budget. Obama simply objected to specific programs. And I agree both Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets where poor uses of Nasa's funding. Cancellation of Constellation program On May 7, 2009, the Obama administration enlisted the Augustine Commission to perform a full independent review of the ongoing NASA space exploration program. The commission found the then current Constellation Program to be woefully under-budgeted, behind schedule by four years or more in several essential components, with significant cost overruns, and unlikely to be capable of meeting any of its scheduled goals under its current budget.[26][27] As a consequence, the commission recommended a significant re-allocation of goals and resources. As one of the many outcomes based on these recommendations, on October 11, 2010, the Constellation program was cancelled, ending development of the Altair, Ares I, and Ares V. The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle survived the cancellation and was renamed the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), to be launched on the Space Launch System.[28] PS: NASA had a related test launch in 2014, but GAO says even a 2023 launch date is optimistic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)
    - azernik 9y ago
      He cut Constellation... and at the same time was a strong advocate for the CRS and CCDev commercial projects. If only he'd managed to kill SLS too, and direct its money to more effective space programs.
dredmorbius 9y ago
This was a major political theme of the 1960s especially. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/moondoggle-the-forgotten-opposition-to-the-apollo-program/262254/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/moond... See (or hear) Gil Scott Heron's "Whitey on the Moon". https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/05/gil-scott-herons-poem-whitey-on-the-moon/239622/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/05/gil-s...

will4274 9y ago

> That may be so, but I've never met one or heard from one You've never heard Barack Obama speak on TV? http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/nasa-grieves-over-canceled-program http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science.... > "For bragging rights?" 1980/1990s Republicans were pro-NASA to the extent that it proved America was the best country in the world. At that time, Democrats were mostly anti-NASA, believing the money could be better spent on other things. Then, both parties underfunded NASA, but Democrats tended to underfund NASA more severely than Republicans. In the mid 2000s, as Republican opposition to global warming and evolution grew, Democrats became more mixed on NASA, as Republican opposition to NASA could be spun as part of a larger "Republicans are anti-science" narrative (a narrative that remains popular today). Simultaneously, Republican concerns about the deficit grew. Truth be told, the situation is not that different today than in the 80s and 90s. Twenty years ago, neither party funded NASA fully, but the Republicans were slightly more willing. Today, neither party will fund NASA fully, but the Democrats are slightly more willing. There are cynical reasons to think that greater willingness is political in both cases.

jacobsheehy 9y ago
> You've never heard Barack Obama speak on TV? Nope. Not about this anyway. > http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35209628/ns/technology_and_science. What's that supposed to mean? It does not show anything like Obama not supporting NASA, or being a Democrat who thinks space isn't a priority, or anything like that. Not sure what point that link is trying to make in this discussion.
free652 9y ago
>You've never heard Barack Obama speak on TV? What you're trying to prove? That Obama gave more money to NASA?
- Alupis 9y ago
  FTA: > President Obama's 2011 budget request for NASA cut the agency's Constellation program completely, effectively canceling a five-year, $9 billion effort to build new Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets. It's always sort of a misnomer that the President sets the budget... they really only get to approve/reject what congress lays out (but take all the credit/blame). Of course a president can wish for certain things, and veto a proposed budget that doesn't meet their political goals, but ultimately it's congress that sets the budget. If I recall, it was the 2016/2017 budget proposal under Speaker Paul Ryan that sought dramatic increases in the NASA budget.
  - Retric 9y ago
    He supported increasing NASA's overall budget. Obama simply objected to specific programs. And I agree both Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets where poor uses of Nasa's funding. Cancellation of Constellation program On May 7, 2009, the Obama administration enlisted the Augustine Commission to perform a full independent review of the ongoing NASA space exploration program. The commission found the then current Constellation Program to be woefully under-budgeted, behind schedule by four years or more in several essential components, with significant cost overruns, and unlikely to be capable of meeting any of its scheduled goals under its current budget.[26][27] As a consequence, the commission recommended a significant re-allocation of goals and resources. As one of the many outcomes based on these recommendations, on October 11, 2010, the Constellation program was cancelled, ending development of the Altair, Ares I, and Ares V. The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle survived the cancellation and was renamed the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), to be launched on the Space Launch System.[28] PS: NASA had a related test launch in 2014, but GAO says even a 2023 launch date is optimistic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)
  - azernik 9y ago
    He cut Constellation... and at the same time was a strong advocate for the CRS and CCDev commercial projects. If only he'd managed to kill SLS too, and direct its money to more effective space programs.

dredmorbius 9y ago

This was a major political theme of the 1960s especially. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/moondoggle-the-forgotten-opposition-to-the-apollo-program/262254/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/moond... See (or hear) Gil Scott Heron's "Whitey on the Moon". https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/05/gil-scott-herons-poem-whitey-on-the-moon/239622/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/05/gil-s...