Steve Staloch: “No. Its demise should become the poster child for all such ‘lofty’ federal projects that are essentially pork-barrel and have no justifiable or sustainable return on investment.”
Ruth Erickson: “The U.S. cannot rely only on private investments in the future research of our universe. We have benefited a great deal with the science and technology in our daily lives, deriving from the research and application of space exploration.”
Julie Morris: “Despite the space shuttle’s retirement, NASA is still a major part of the US space program with a $17.7 billion budget in fiscal year 2013. Like other fiscally strapped government programs though, future funding will most likely come from the private sector which has the ability to innovate and adjust to markets (needs) much faster than government. I don’t see scientific discovery slowing due to a lack of government subsidies.”
Marty Richman: “Yes, we’re now merely paying passengers. Killing our manned space capability abdicates America’s world leadership and sends a dangerous message – we are willing to be just another ‘also-ran.’”
Nants Foley: “NASA has finished with the shuttles, and is moving on to deeper space exploration. A moment of remembrance, please, for those lost on the Challenger on 1-28-86: McAuliffe, Jarvis, McNair, Resnik, Smith, Scobee and Onizuka; and on the Columbia on 2-1-03: Brown, Chawla, Clark, Anderson, Ramon, Husband and McCool.”
Bill Mifsud: “Yes. The United States has always been the forerunner in space exploration. Now we are going to rely on Russian exploration and team up with another country. I feel we are taking a step back as space exploration in the future may be more important as time goes on.”
