On July 8, we watched the last liftoff of the space shuttle. Back on April 15, 2010, President Barack Obama announced his plans to scrap NASA’s current space program. Why would he destroy NASA? Don’t we have the best aeronautical program in the world?

Why does Obama want to fix what isn’t broken? He thinks private companies can build the current space shuttle’s replacement quicker and more cost-effectively than NASA. Really? So this is about saving money?

Back in the Apollo days, NASA’s budget was 3 percent to 4 percent of the federal budget. Today, it is less than 1 percent. Is this really breaking the budget?

Just who are these private companies? Lockheed Martin is one. Then there is Boeing. Why these two companies? It’s payback time. In 2010, Lockheed Martin gave $800,000 in campaign money; Boeing gave $900,000. Obama is increasing NASA’s budget by only $6 billion. Give a million and get a billion.

But wait, Obama is proposing that the United States buy tickets on a Russian rocket to get our astronauts and cargo into space. In fact, he proposes that we buy six seats a year on Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft — at $56 million per seat — for however long it takes for the private sector to build a replacement.

What’s more, in the best-case scenario, the soonest a privately built space shuttle can be ready is 2014. So, what is really breaking the budget?

Steve Grover

Fairfield

Copy the Story Link