Everyone in the space community is asking: "What will happen to NASA?"
Under normal economic and political conditions we could assume that the
various NASA science and human spaceflight programs would proceed as
planned. As we know, the current conditions are anything but normal.
There is a new Administration. The country is experiencing a deepening
recession. The world is becoming more dangerous and international
competitiveness in the space arena is getting fierce. The underlying
question is: What can and will the new Administration do to answer all
of the challenges and how will those actions affect NASA?
Let's consider a few realistic options. The first and most obvious
choice is to allow "business as usual" at NASA. Leave unchanged the
current planning and budgeting, allowing NASA to continue its
Constellation Program, planned space science missions and other
activities. At first glance this seems highly unlikely given the
pressure to trim programs, combine defense and civil efforts and
refocus government spending on stimulating the economy. Add to this the
fact that NASA does not yet have a new administrator. All this must be
weighing heavily on NASA and contractor morale. Jobs are at stake.
Programs are at stake. Even the future of whole companies is in
question. May even the survival of NASA itself be in question?
Second, if we assume the worst practical scenario for our space
program, it is unrealistic to think that NASA will not survive.
Nevertheless, a reduction in budgets and stretch-out of programs seems
entirely possible, if not highly probable. Specifically, it seems
logical that the shuttle retirement will be delayed, thereby extending
the life of the shuttle for several years.
All lunar missions may be postponed and all work on human exploration
beyond the moon might be cancelled. As part of this scenario, it is
likely that NASA will be asked to seriously consider using an EELV
instead of Ares I when the shuttle is finally retired. This option
would be traumatic in terms of NASA's Vision for Space Exploration, but
the space spending rate would be flattened or reduced over the next
several years. These actions might relieve some pressure on the
national deficit while allowing President Obama to refocus some funds
on expanded social programs such as education and healthcare.
Finally, let's be more optimistic and assume the best possible scenario
for NASA. The stated purpose of the stimulus package is to recharge the
economy and create several million jobs. One day the President may have
an epiphany and realize that NASA presents a unique opportunity to
simultaneously answer many of the current challenges that face the
nation. He might push Congress to increase support for NASA in order to
create the kind of jobs that increase productivity, national stature
and international competitiveness. Not only will more funding and
support for NASA programs satisfy critical economic needs, but the
nation would respond to international challenges to our future
supremacy in space technology.
These three scenarios seem to span the basic possible options available
to the President. It is unlikely that any of these will become fact,
but it is likely that a combination of these scenarios will evolve over
the coming months. Let's at least hope that deliberations concerning
our space future fully consider NASA's impact on job creation, national
security, technology, innovation, science and education as well as
national pride and leadership.
