Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

Ian · 2004-05-01 08:09:03

I wonder if Bush is just having this Moon to Mars vision just to make himself be popular in order to get re-elected? Is that true?

GCNRevenger · 2004-05-01 08:40:15

Pardon the pun, but National space travel doesn't occur in a (political) vacuum.

I'm sure PlanBush is at least in part a political maneuver, but so what if it gets us out of the Shuttle/ISS debacle and gets us someplace?

RobS · 2004-05-01 09:04:24

All the polls show that the majority of Americans think this is a bad time to go back to the moon and/or go to Mars, so the Bush position is unpopular, not popular. Of course, the public probably could be swayed if someone pushed the matter, but no one seems willing to do that. The war and the economy obviously are more important issues. If Bush started to push space, critics could accuse him of trying to avoid the bigger issues, which, polls show, the American public is losing confidence in his ability to handle properly.

The bigger question is, when the Commission's report is released in June, will it just gather dust, or will administration officials push it with Congress so that it gets funded. Right now funding is looking doubtful.

-- RobS

rstones8 · 2004-05-01 13:30:46

Whether or not this plan goes anywhere will most likely be up to the next administration, and the following one as well. If Bush is re-elected, hopefully he will stick to it and make sure the Moon to Mars Comission's report doesnt end up in the same stack as the 90-Day Report. However, if Kerry is elected it could be another story.

BTW, anyone know Kerry's stance on the issue, or if he has one at all?

deagleninja · 2004-05-01 14:25:15

Kerry does not support manned missions to the moon or Mars.

The SEI (space exploration initiative) is going to be killed before it starts. Several members of Congress have already voiced their pessimism, and they number more than the supporters.

Was it just a political pie-in-the-sky? Yes and no. Lot of thought was put into it and the plan does show fiscal responcibility that most in Congress would normally support, but the timing was horrible. If Bush had made this proposal just after Columbia blew up, then I think it would have passed.

The biggest problem though has been NASA's responce to the SEI. Two days after Bush's speech, Sean O' Keefe announced that Hubble wouldn't be serviced. The reasoning for his decision makes NASA look like they are scared to ever fly again let alone go to the moon or Mars. And even now the debate in Congress is going on, and NASA seems satisfied to wait and twiddle their thumbs until the decision is made.

If O' Keefe would tell Congress that members who vote against the budget increase are killing future astronauts then I think they'd find it hard to vote no.
:band: :band: :band:

rstones8 · 2004-05-01 21:55:19

Kerry does not support manned missions to the moon or Mars.

Damn. :realllymad: Well then I guess I know who's getting my vote.

Hazer · 2004-05-01 23:35:29

If you do not want the plan to die, fight for it. You are the constituents!

deagleninja · 2004-05-02 07:11:19

rstones8- Just because Bush made one speech doesn't mean he does either...

rstones8 · 2004-05-02 22:01:33

True, but one speech is better than no speech, and one speech is definetly better than not supporting the plan (as you noted Kerry does).

And Hazer is right, fight for it we must! However writing, calling, or even visiting congressmen about the issue will only go so far, when they have so much else on their plates to consider, and so many other things they would rather spend the national budget on.

If only congress could somehow see past the imediate expenses to the enormous returns such a mission would bring, not only in science and technology (I know, blah, blah, blah... we've all heard this all before ), but more importantly to the progress of humanity.

Mark Friedenbach · 2004-05-02 23:23:40

Kerry does not support manned missions to the moon or Mars.
Damn. :realllymad: Well then I guess I know who's getting my vote.

You've got to be kidding me. There are so many things in this election more important than space policy.

In any case it's not even clear how Bush stands on the issue. Intentionally or not, his exploration plan's done more harm than good so far, congress doesn't like it, and no one in the white house has stepped up to defend it. It could have been a shot in the dark (in which case don't expect any support if it continues to backfire).

EDIT: i should also mention that kerry's not anti-space, it's just that the majority of americans are against the new bush plan, so he's made a snide remark about it from time to time. he's actually neutral to space issues and could be a ally if someone could show him a cheaper way getting to mars to one-up bush (*ahem* mars direct). the mars society is working on this.

Hazer · 2004-05-03 01:31:13

Bah...Anything that gets us to Mars quicker. The majority of Americans are in favor of staying on this rock and not getting boots dirty in red Martian dust. I suggest that we do not let that stop space/Mars advocates. We have a valid issue to press, as do many other advocacy groups and if we do not vo cally press the issue, we can expect to be ignored. Who knows, perhaps we can generate some enthusiasm among the other voters?

If only Congress could do this...
If only Congress could do that...
If only...If only...If only...

If only people didn't call for those in power to do the governing for them. If only people would stop using, "I can't do enough, so I won't do anything" as an excuse to not take action.

You cannot get us to Mars by wishful thinking, and I doubt members of Congress frequent this message board.
I am going to register for the first time as an honest-to-gosh voter when I get home from my first year at college as an engineering student. Then I intend to start pestering my Senators and Representatives with letters.

*Steps off soapbox*

deagleninja · 2004-05-03 09:31:45

About Kerry's stance:

I believe that he is only taking this postion because Bush is taking the other. As soon as Bush made his speech, many Democrats started poking fun at him and it. This doesn't mean they aren't pro-space just that its an election year.

Gore was very pro-space. I often wonder what speech he would have given had he won the race, oh wait he did, lol.

Ian Flint · 2004-05-03 10:09:33

If Bush had given his little space speach in his first year in office and then supported it afterward; and if he had not invaded Iraq -- then I might have voted for him in the coming election.

I don't care what Kerry's stance on space is. He is getting my vote, simply because he's not Bush.

I don't think PlanBush will go anywhere, though. It sounds like it is becoming a repeat of SEI. Daddy couldn't get us to Mars and Sonnyboy can't either.

I'll just stick with the Mars Society and keep making grassroots, incremental progress.

rstones8 · 2004-05-03 17:40:07

If only Congress could do this...
If only Congress could do that...
If only...If only...If only...
If only people didn't call for those in power to do the governing for them. If only people would stop using, "I can't do enough, so I won't do anything" as an excuse to not take action.

I have in fact written to not only the President and Senators of my state, but also other Congressmen in the appropriate committees (the House's Space and Aeronautics Subcommitte, and the Senate's Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee), urging them to support a Mars mission in any way they can, and that the moon is not the right goal for NASA (in my opinion). Many have not responded, but the Senators of my state have shown support, with one even passing my letter on to NASA. It is good that some Congressmen show support, but my letters will indeed not be enough. IF ONLY( ) everyone who supports Mars missions would let their thoughts be known to Congress, we may get somewhere.

PurduesUSAFguy · 2004-05-06 00:56:01

Having family and friends in the Administration I can say that the white house has expended considerable political capital behind the scenes pushing for the NASA budget increases, that more the likely will get passed once all the political wrangling is done with.

As for the Moon-Mars initive as a political issue. Well it isn't. It doesn't make sense as one. The 'Space Community' is a very small one with negligible political pull. By announcing MMI Bush took a considerable political risk, drawing fire from fiscal conservatives on the right for increasing spending and from everyone on the left for breathing.

As far as Kerry goes on space, I couldn't find any public statements on it other then some snide remarks, but I'm guessing those are mostly motivated by the fact that Bush said it and so far he's running mostly on that, i.e., the fact that he isn't Bush and very little else.

In any event I have to agree with Mark Friedenbach, there are issues at stake in this election far greater then space policy (although Space and the National labs are vital for the long term security of our country, both economically and militarily). Kerry would put a screeching halt on the modernization of the military, would be weak on foreign policy, is pro-UN and would further weaken US sovereignty, would raise taxes that damage the growing economy, and support billions of dollars worth of new vaguely Marxist socialist programs. (The Bush drug plan was a big enough mistake)
Having family and friends in the Administration I can say that the white house has expended considerable political capital behind the scenes pushing for the NASA budget increases, that more the likely will get passed once all the political wrangling is done with.

As for the Moon-Mars initive as a political issue. Well it isn't. It doesn't make sense as one. The 'Space Community' is a very small one with negligible political pull. By announcing MMI Bush took a considerable political risk, drawing fire from fiscal conservatives on the right for increasing spending and from everyone on the left for breathing.

As far as Kerry goes on space, I couldn't find any public statements on it other then some snide remarks, but I'm guessing those are mostly motivated by the fact that Bush said it and so far he's running mostly on that, i.e., the fact that he isn't Bush and very little else.

In any event I have to agree with Mark Friedenbach, there are issues at stake in this election far greater then space policy (although Space and the National labs are vital for the long term security of our country, both economically and militarily). Kerry would put a screeching halt on the modernization of the military, would be dangerously weak on foreign policy, is pro-UN and would further weaken US sovereignty, would raise taxes that damage the growing economy, and support billions of dollars worth of new vaguely Marxist socialist programs. (The Bush drug plan was a big enough mistake)

I could go on but long story short, if you want to see Humans to Mars and not see your taxes raised considerably, Vote Bush

idiom · 2004-05-06 01:56:23

Kerry won't so much get elected as Bush will get un-elected.

Finding somewhere else to spend money stimulates the economy.

If the admin can kill the shuttle and the ISS fast, then NASA has nothing else to spend money one. They can't very well fire everybody either.

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2004-05-30 10:01:34

Some people have siad its just a re-election stunt?

Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush, proposed a sustained commitment to human exploration of the solar system -- with a return to the moon as a stepping stone to Mars -- in 1989, on the 20th anniversary of the first human landing on the moon. NASA came up with a budget-busting cost estimate of $400 billion, which sank the project.
Since 1967, space-going countries have signed a treaty in which they promise to do everything possible to avoid contamination while exploring other planets. And thank goodness. If they didn’t do this, any life we one day find on Mars might simply be something we took there ourselves.The Question is will we ever live on Mars?

George Bush seems to think so. He has promised to send astronauts back to the Moon no later than 2020, with the intention of building a permanent base. From there we’ll then be able to go to Mars… and beyond, he said. Technologically it is possible. But critics are calling Bush’s statements an election stunt. And everyone agrees it will take immense amounts of money, time and resources to do it.

Former Ohio Senator John Glenn, the first American to orbit the Earth, has said that before deciding to race off to the Moon or Mars, the nation needs to complete the international space station and provide the taxi service to accommodate a full crew of six or seven.
At the same time, Mr Glenn said Nasa could be laying out a long-term plan, setting a loose timetable and investing in the engineering challenges of sending people to Mars.
U.S. space pioneer John Glenn said on Thursday that President Bush's space exploration plan "pulls the rug out from under our scientists" and might waste too much money to ever put astronauts on Mars.

"I think we're voluntarily stopping some of the most unique, cutting-edge research in the history of the whole world."
-John Glenn
Glenn, a retired Democratic senator from Ohio and the first U.S. astronaut to orbit the Earth, said NASA should not abandon research on the International Space Station and questioned the advisability of using the moon as a stepping stone to Mars.
His stinging rebuke of the Bush plan came in testimony before the presidential commission charged with developing a strategy for building a permanent base on the moon, then sending astronauts on to Mars. The commission met at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Glenn's home state of Ohio.
The octogenarian space pioneer's most cutting comments were reserved for NASA's plans to gut the International Space Station of a once-ambitious research agenda, limiting science only to studies applicable to the moon and Mars program.
"We have projects that are planned or in the queue now, projects that people -- academics and laboratories and companies -- have spent millions of dollars to get ready," Glenn said. "That pulls the rug out from under our scientists who placed their faith in NASA, and our scientists within NASA who devoted years and years to their work."
Glenn said basic research had always been part of the human space flight program, dating back to his own three-orbit flight in 1962: "We tried to get everything we could on to every flight back in those days."

He said cutting the research component of the space station program would save only about $2.5 million.
"I think we're voluntarily stopping some of the most unique, cutting-edge research in the history of the whole world. Now we're going to let other nations do it and they'll be able to benefit from it. I just don't think that's right. I think that's a mistake. For a few bucks, we could continue this research," he said.
NASA spokesman Glen Mahone said research aboard the space station will continue but will be limited to the effects of space flight on human physiology.
"We're going to do the research that's important for us to fulfill the president's vision," Mahone said.

Glenn said he would support returning to the moon for research purposes, but urged the panel to seriously consider whether building habitable moon bases as a stepping stone to Mars was cost effective.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp … on/2433348

Mad Grad Student · 2004-05-30 21:56:19

I don't care what Kerry's stance on space is. He is getting my vote, simply because he's not Bush.

Yes! Yes! We need more people with a stance like this, this election is going to be very close, and every little bit helps. I could go into a great amount of detail on why absolutely anyone but George Bush must be elected this year, but unless someone wants to ask to hear it right now I'm gonna guess that the consensus here is political opinions to yourself. Or at least save them for tha appropirate thread.

I checked John Kerry's website, and to be honest I didn't see the word space used once in the right context at the site. Zero mention of any space policy. It's just as well, I assume, no one seems really to care about this Bush policy anymore (General public I mean), and Kerry's definately going to stay away from the issue unless he's really pressured to jump in, which I don't see happening. His campaign is more and more becoming like the SNL joke, Seth Meyers proclaiming "I've found that when I just shut up, and let Bush screw up, my ratings skyrocket." My guess for his space policy will be that he'll grant NASA no extra funding, but tell them to go ahead with the Bush plan anyway. "Do the best you can, but don't ask for any more money" is the stance seen most often. I'm estimating that, assuming no other paradigm shift occurs, and that China, the ESA, or a private company doesn't pressure NASA, that we'll actually at least get back to the Moon, albeit after a long, exceedingly delayed gestation period like what happened with the space shuttle. Going by this scinerio, the next steps on the Moon will occur about 2025 to 2030.

Cobra Commander · 2004-05-31 08:55:34

Quote (Ian Flint @ May 03 2004, 10:09)
I don't care what Kerry's stance on space is. He is getting my vote, simply because he's not Bush.
Yes! Yes! We need more people with a stance like this...

:laugh:

I've said it before and no doubt will again, today's Democrats do not like the space program, at all. They by and large see it as a waste of money that could be better used "helping people" here. The Bush "plan" is riddled with flaws, but it's on the table. Kerry, whether in space policy or most anything else, has brought nothing to the table.

Rxke · 2004-05-31 09:44:44

From what i've read, Kerry is actually against the whole Moon-Mars idea...

(old news, http://www.spacepolitics.com/archives/000083.html]but maybe interesting)

Read the comments, too...

John Creighton · 2004-05-31 10:18:10

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as education and health care."

Cobra Commander · 2004-05-31 10:41:13

Sen. John Kerry: "Our civilian space program represents a great opportunity for scientific research. Sending a person to Mars is a great mission worthy of a great nation like America. Given the Bush budget deficit, it is imperative that we balance funding for a manned mission to Mars against critical domestic needs as well, such as education and health care."

He's trying to appeal to those who support the mission while leaving himself an easy out, that's what he does. "Balance against domestic needs" is a nice way of saying "if only we didn't have all these problems right here in America. Sigh..."

MarsDog · 2004-05-31 11:44:06

Is Bush going to reject Utopia, Gold at the end of the Rainbow, Life after Death? The Eqyptians had their motivation which created a society; unfortunately, the pyramids did not prevent the change of climate.
-
We are faced with threaths and opportunities. Bush is acting on the hope and vision shared by others. The capability, necessity and desire is there. So what if it unfolds according to political upmanship ?

Ian Flint · 2004-05-31 20:19:08

Bush is a warmongering, swaggering, shortsighted, stuttering, blundering, lying fool. Even if he fully funded Mars Direct just to show up the...err...French -- Yeah, he really hates those guys! -- I wouldn't want him in office for another four years. It's the warmongering that I can't stand.

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-01 11:09:48

Yeah, that awful lying no-good President! Going and bombing poor countries that pose no threat to the world without paying any heed to the world community through the United Nations. And what was his excuse? Freeing oppressed people? Stopping genocide? Bah humbug, the war mongerer, he ought to be tried in the World Court of Justice for this...

*Cough* Oh you were talking about President BUSH? Gee sorry, just getting flashbacks of Clinton bombing Bosnia and "non exsistant" Iraqi nerve gas factories!

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-05-01 08:09:03

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#2 2004-05-01 08:40:15

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#3 2004-05-01 09:04:24

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#4 2004-05-01 13:30:46

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#5 2004-05-01 14:25:15

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#6 2004-05-01 21:55:19

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#7 2004-05-01 23:35:29

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#8 2004-05-02 07:11:19

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#9 2004-05-02 22:01:33

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#10 2004-05-02 23:23:40

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#11 2004-05-03 01:31:13

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#12 2004-05-03 09:31:45

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#13 2004-05-03 10:09:33

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#14 2004-05-03 17:40:07

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#15 2004-05-06 00:56:01

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#16 2004-05-06 01:56:23

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#17 2004-05-30 10:01:34

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#18 2004-05-30 21:56:19

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#19 2004-05-31 08:55:34

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#20 2004-05-31 09:44:44

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#21 2004-05-31 10:18:10

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#22 2004-05-31 10:41:13

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#23 2004-05-31 11:44:06

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#24 2004-05-31 20:19:08

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

#25 2004-06-01 11:09:48

Re: Bush and Mars and Re-election - Bush and Mars and Re-election

Board footer