Newt Gingrich's Vision For The Future of NASA: Daring And Essential

Last July, I wrote an entry regarding our nation’s growing abandonment of NASA and space exploration. I was and still am genuinely irked by the fact that politicians and many everyday citizens fail to see the intrinsic value that space exploration has for our economy and what I call the “National Psyche”. Since writing that piece, there have been both positive and negative developments in the struggle to keep space exploration alive. The biggest plus has been the $17.8 billion dollar budget for the 2012 fiscal year that President Obama granted to NASA back in November. The budget, although seemingly the same as 2011’s, appropriates $530 million to the James Webb Space Telescope Program, more than enough to sustain the development of Hubble’s successor through at least this year. Last summer, it appeared as though the demise of James Webb was a given, due to the steep cuts that were being made in virtually all areas of our nation’s budget. Then, last September, NASA unveiled its proposed plans for the program that will eventually replace the now defunct space shuttle fleet. It’s called the Space Launch System (SLS), and it could potentially propel the human race farther into space than ever before. However, it’s a plan that somewhat lacks in innovation and ingenuity, a point that I will touch on later.

The downside to all of this exciting news is that our elected officials are still steadily admonishing NASA’s place in 21st century America. Some want to downsize it, while others would prefer to shut the program down altogether. And even those who have vocally defended NASA in the past are quickly becoming more guarded when speaking about its future. For example, during an interview with ABC 13 in Houston late last year, President Obama professed his commitment to continuing manned space flight, but he did so in a cautious, less than convincing manner. He repeatedly said that NASA had to “re-tool” in order to function effectively within “budget objectives”. In other words, the President believes that NASA must be slimmed down in order to survive. Recently, the candidates vying for the Republican Presidential nomination have also weighed in on what role NASA should be playing in the 21st century. Although all four of them have expressed some level of admiration for the space program, only one candidate has outlined a clear, robust, and daring vision for space travel in America: former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich, who is well known for his unforgiving bravado and grandiosity, isn’t somebody that I view all that favorably. I would probably never consider voting for him due to his views on most other issues, but I have to give him credit where it’s due. He seems to share space enthusiasts’ understanding of the necessity of space travel on both a practical and imaginative level. Last week, during a campaign stop in Florida, Gingrich outlined the two major goals that he would like to accomplish in terms of space travel:

1. Establish an American base on the Moon by 2020

2. Develop a continuous propulsion system that will allow for Americans to reach Mars in the near future

Those are definitely lofty aspirations, but are they plausible? Yes, they are, and Gingirch has done a good job of highlighting how they can be successfully completed. Instead of stripping NASA apart, he believes that the program should work in conjunction with corporations, private enterprises, and highly motivated individual researchers. That way, the program could survive on a slightly smaller budget while at the same time team up with experts outside of NASA to create a highly cooperative space program. Gingirch has also proposed that the incentive of cash prizes would be provided to the people or organizations that develop new space technologies, technologies that would eventually be used to colonize the Moon and start a manned mission to Mars. Certainly, Newt’s plan is one that relies on fostering American competitive and ingenuity, ideas that you would think most people would be in favor of.

However, the past few days have revealed that’s not the case. Gingrich’s plan has been lambasted by his political rivals. During last Thursday’s CNN Presidential debate in Jacksonville, Gingrich’s fellow GOP candidates took turns taking pot shots at his moon base plan. Mitt Romney said that it “would be an enormous expense” and joked that “If I had a business executive come to me and say that they wanted to spend a few hundred million dollars to put a colony on the Moon, I would say you’re fired.” Rick Santorum said “[promising] new programs and big ideas…is not a responsible thing” when we have a $1.2 trillion dollar deficit. And Ron Paul, whose libertarian principles are very anti-government, said that we shouldn’t be exploring space “for the fun of it” and that government investments in NASA should be limited to space defense only. Pundits and comedians also joined in with ridicule. Columnists referred to the former speaker as “Newt Skywalker” and The Daily Show insinuated that Gingrich had to be out of touch with reality in order to actively support building a U.S. base on the Moon.

The truth is, Gingrich is more in touch with reality on this issue than any of the aforementioned detractors. Building an American base on the Moon isn’t simply a self indulgent Star Wars fantasy, and it’s not as if we’d simply send people up there in order to live like The Jetsons. Research would be conducted regularly, and this research could yield tons of data that would potentially reshape our understanding of the Moon. Right now, we don’t even definitively know how the Moon came into existence. How, then, is doing thorough research on it a waste of money and resources? America used to embrace scientific and exploratory endeavors, from the days of the Lewis and Clark expedition right up to the first Moon landing in 1969. It’s odd, then, that we are beginning to abandon those ideals at a time when creativity is booming in technological industries.

It should also be noted that, contrary to the views of Romney and friends, an expansion of NASA wouldn’t simply be a massive leech on taxpayer dollars. These same candidates are continually harping upon the fact that our nation’s brightest minds are leaving the country in droves in order to take advantage of openings for highly skilled jobs in other countries. Well, that’s because there’s not enough highly skilled, science related jobs in the U.S. Why, then, is there such a heated opposition to Gingrich’s plan? Building a Moon base and a propulsion system that could take humans to Mars would undoubtedly create thousands upon thousands of new math and science jobs in the U.S. Furthermore, this plan is far more interesting and innovative than NASA’s current SLS plan. Sure, the SLS is an impressive spacecraft, but it is heavily derived from the Space Shuttle program. It is meant, at least initially, to serve the same basic functions as the Shuttle did. It will even use many of the same components as the shuttles did, meaning that the same companies that supplied shuttle parts will undoubtedly end up supplying parts for the SLS, leaving new potential innovators out in the cold. Simply put, NASA’s current plan is a step sideways. Newt’s is a step forward.

This is not an endorsement of Newt Gingrich the candidate. I could never vote for him in a general election due to his views on economics and foreign policy. However, this is an endorsement of his vision for NASA. What Newt is talking about goes far beyond the topic of space exploration. It is a topic that tackles the issue of what America is going to become in the 21st century. Will we be the torchbearers for intellectual and scientific enlightenment in the world, or will be complacent with having our high school students rank 25th globally on math and science tests? Will we continue to pour billions upon billions of dollars into defense projects that result in tanks and fighter jets sitting idly in hangers for decades, or will we invest in a space travelling system that brings discovery and exploration to new heights? Will we push our human potential to the next level, or have we deluded ourseleves into a state of intellectual complacency?

I noted earlier that Rick Santorum said that promising big ideas was an irresponsible thing to do. He’s wrong. With our nation and the world struggling to create a job boom in the 21st century, big ideas and challenges are essential if we are to find a way out of our economic dire straits. Building an American Moon base will also build up our economy, intelligence, and national identity.

And that is exactly what this country needs right now.