Week 3
Running head: H.R. 312 1
H.R. 312 “The Mars Exploration Act”
Kahlib J. Fischer
February 11, 2015
PADM 550-B01
Dr. Kahlib Fischer
H.R. 312 2
Defining the Problem
Space exploration has largely been limited since the moon landing (Sires, 2015), includingto
space station visits and the deployment of the Hubble telescope and other satellites (2015). In
2012, President Obama, in conjunction with bi-partisan support, signed into law H.R. 312, “The
Mars Exploration Act” (2012). This bill provides funding for the development and deployment
ofhas three goals: 1) fund the development and deployment of Mars “rovers”; 2) fund the
development of space ships capable of sending humans to Marsdeep space transportation for
humasn; and 3) fund the development of and deployment of technology and housing needed to
create laboratory and housing facilities on the surface of Mars for astronauts and scientists
(Robinson & Smith, 2012).
May
Biblical guidelines: and principles
Of course, the Bible says nothing about space exploration, either specifically as it relates to
government’s role therein or generally. Therefore, we must focus on general themes from
Scripture about what government may or may not do. Government is charged primarily for with
protecting the inalienable rights of its citizens (Fischer). HR 312 does not violate these rights.
The Biblical notion of “sphere sovereignty” further implies that there are other spheres of
society, such as business, non-profits, and industry, which might be considered as relevant
participants in space exploration (Monsma, 2008). In the past, space exploration has been linked
to national defense, for fear that other nations would gain the upper-hand in space and use that
advantage against American citizens (Neuhaus, 2012). Since government has a divine mandate
to protect its citizens, space exploration might be supported. In summary, while there seems to
H.R. 312 3
be implicit Biblical support for the role of government in space exploration, participation with
non-governmental spheres should also be included.
Constitutional guidelines for federal and state involvement:
The “common defense” portion of the preamble supports the passages of this bill as it relates to
providing for the common defense. Article 1 section 8 provides further points of support: the
promotion of science and progress, the development of a sound military, and the regulation of
commerce with foreign nations.
Can
Political Feasibility:
Generally, the public favors further mars exploration and colonization (Smith, 2014). The
passage of the bill was largely bi-partisan, but a significant Republican minority tried to block
passage both in committee hearings and on the floor of the House, arguing that the funding was
not present for the bill and suggesting that the President was merely doing this to distract from
criticism of his health care legislation and other scandals (Neuhaus, 2012). Meanwhile, sSince
passage, some experts have argued that Mars colonization is not obtainable as NASA is currently
constructed and has argued for either repeal of HR 312 or significant modification (Richards,
2015).
Financial feasibility:
Total cost of the bill was estimated at $20.5 billion, according to the Congressional Budget
Office (“H.R. 312”). At the time of passage, Democrats and Republicans were grappling with
the debt ceiling crisis (Barnes, 2011).
Practical feasibility:
H.R. 312 4
The bill was set up to fund NASA efforts for Mars exploration over a 20 year period with
colonization being achieved by year 20. The major challenge was the development of
sufficiently fast and safe space travel for humans (Geyer, 2012). Mars Rovers have been sent to
Mars, so, in effect, Phase 1 has been achieved. Significant challenges exist for phases 2 and 3,
however, as NASA grapples with developing the proper technology for long-term space
exploration and colonization (Richards, 2015).
Should
HR 312 passes the May portion of the analysis, with the caveat that government should allow for
business and non-profit participation. The Can portion of the analysis is more challenging,
simply because of current levels of deficit spending in the federal government as well as the
technological challenges. Nevertheless, HR 312 represents a legitimate area for government
involvement. Space exploration, if not simply for the sake of military defense, should continue
and thus government must be involved. We are not able to choose ideal times for something as
lofty and abstract as space exploration; yet it must remain a national priority. Thus it is
recommended, despite persistent economic and foreign policy issues, that HR 312 not be
repealed; rather, modifications should be explored to allow for tax credits and other incentives to
allow industry to become involved (2015).
H.R. 312 5
References
Barnes, A. (2011). The Debt ceiling crisis. National Review Online. Retrieved from
http://www.nro.com/dc_13
Fischer, K. Biblical principles of government [PDF document]. Retrieved from Lecture Notes
Online website: https://learn.liberty.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-6267706-dt-content-rid-
43218699_1/courses/PADM550_B01_201520/Biblical%20Principles%20of%20Govern
ment%281%29.pdf
Geyer, A. (2012). To mars and beyond. Space. 15(1), 52-56. doi:10.1108/03090560710821161
H.R. 312 (2012). The Mars Exploration Act. Congressional Budget Office. Retrieved from
www.cbo.gov.HR312.
Monsma, S. (2008). Healing for a broken world. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
Neuhaus, J. (2012). Mars madness. Space Exploration. Retrieved from
http://www.spaceex.com/mmhr312
Richards, D. (2015). The Mars question. Journal of Science and Politics, 10(2), 38-42. Retrieved
from http://www.jsp.org
Robinson, J. & Smith, B. (2012). What does HR 312 mean for the future of space exploration?
Journal of Science and Politics, 4(2), 3-12. doi:10.1108/988890560710821161
Sires, D. (2015, October 9). Has NASA lost its way? Popular Science, 8, 27-29.
Smith, R. (2014). Does the public even care? Space Exploration. Retrieved from
http://www.spaceex.com/pubhr312
- Defining the Problem
- May
- Can
- Should
- References