MONDAY
E-mail a friendSen. Bill Nelson
airdate January 23, 2004
Bill Nelson was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2000. A lifetime Floridian, he previously served six years as a member of the state Cabinet and 12 years as a congressman. He's an expert on NASA, who, after intensive training, spent six days on the Space Shuttle Columbia as a payload specialist. Since, he's worked to protect the environment and been an advocate for space exploration. Nelson's assignments include the Budget, Armed Services and Finance committees—the latter of which is key to healthcare reform.
Sen. Bill Nelson
Tavis: Let me start by asking you why it is you think the president hasn't earmarked enough money for space exploration, specifically this mission to Mars. I think he called for spending, like, $12 billion, and you think that that's not enough.
Nelson: Well, that's not really what he proposed, and I start from the point that you can't do space-flight on the cheap, and when you do is when you get in trouble, as we have now over the last 17-year period where we lost 2 space shuttles because not enough attention was given to the safety. In fact, over the last decade, they were not putting money into the safety upgrades for the space shuttle. So let's take a comparison. Go back to when President Kennedy said we're going to the moon. He said we're going in 9 years. He doubled NASA's budget in the first year, doubled it again in the second year, and almost doubled it again in the third year. Now President Bush says we're going back to the moon in approximately 9 years, and his proposed increase is only $200 million a year for 5 years. Well, that's nowhere near the mark. The other part of the 12 billion that you're talking about, which is 11 billion, he wants reprogrammed out of other NASA programs, and you just can't get blood out of a turnip.
Tavis: Let me challenge you respectfully, though, because some no doubt watching right now would say, with all due respect, Senator, we understand, given our introduction, your passion for space exploration, but $12 billion ain't exactly doin' nothin' on the cheap, sir.
Nelson: Well, but it's not 12 billion. It's 200 million a year for 5 years. He said a billion dollars extra--that's all he said--over 5 years, and that's the difference. Now, if you want to discuss the policy questions about where should money be spent on education or health care or space travel or the war in Iraq, then that's a different question, but you asked me the question...
Tavis: Right.
Nelson: Can you go to the moon?
Tavis: Not to interrupt, I'm sorry, well, let's talk about that because you raise a significant issue. You must be psychic 'cause I wanted to go there anyway. How do you respond to Americans who suggest that whatever that amount of money is, given the tightness of our economy right now, given that there are people right now who are economically disenfranchised, why we would make a decision to spend that kind of money right now?
Nelson: Well, of course, this is the worst possible time because we've got a budget that's out of control. We've got a budget that is hemorrhaging red ink. We've got a budget that because of the irresponsible fiscal policies of this administration is spending a $1/2 trillion more than we have coming in in tax revenue, and so it's the worst possible times. But if you say back in a time, for example the sixties when the budget was much more in balance, can we do all? Remember the decade of the sixties. Remember the social programs. Remember the civil rights. And that was also the time that President Kennedy set us on a course to do extraordinary things, to go to the moon and return. And, Tavis, I'd just say that, you know, they don't have to be mutually exclusionary. If you develop technology, if you do incredible things in the development and research, you're going to benefit your society and its quality of life.
Tavis: My friends on the right, and I suspect your friends on the right, suggest all the time that the problem with folk who are left of center on the education issue, since you raised that issue earlier, is that too many people think that the way to solve the education crisis in this country is to throw more money at the problem. Let me take that same--that same notion at least and ask you whether or not the real problems of NASA have to do with too little money or with human error, with things that should have been looked at? We keep seeing these stories come out every day, as we see this investigation of the last shuttle disaster, that suggested, sir, that it ain't about a shortage of money, it's that folk weren't doing what they should have done and weren't being as scrupulous as they should have done--been rather--about the program and about the faults that they thought were before them.
Nelson: Well, Tavis, you're hitting at the problem, and I can summarize it by telling you that the problem that NASA got into in the destruction of 2 shuttles in the course of 17 years was the problem of arrogance. And arrogance in the top leadership bred a lack of communication from the bottom up. They wanted the communication just to go from the top down, and that's when you get in trouble. And that's when they didn't listen back in 1986 to those engineers that were trying to stop the count because they warned exactly on the stiffening of the o-rings in the cold weather. And that's exactly what happened 17 years later, a year ago, when we lost Columbia, because they weren't listening to those engineers at the ground level who were saying, "Wait a minute. You're not taking into account the foam that's coming off and it's gonna hit the wing."
Tavis: But that raises the question, Senator, as to why the American people ought to be asked now, and to use your phrase, this most difficult of times, to pay for the arrogance or the ignorance of the folk who work at NASA?
Nelson: Well, the long and short of it is that this nation has always been a nation of explorers and adventurers. We've always had a frontier. The frontier used to be westward, now the frontier is upward and it's inward. And if we ever stop pushing that exploration of a frontier, we become a second-rate nation. It's part of our nature, our character, as a people. And, Tavis, you don't have to make this an either or situation. What you need is leadership that can accomplish all of this and have a balanced fiscal policy that will give you the money in order to be able to do it all, and we don't have that right now. And as a matter of fact, isn't it interesting that the president did not mention in his State of the Union speech his space initiative to the moon and to Mars? And that's because it hasn't been received so very well, and he hasn't put the juice to it which is the money in order to accomplish it. And so what you have is a policy that was thrown out there, and we don't see a lot of heft behind it.
Tavis: Well, as I listen to you talk about the frontier, what makes America a great nation, you almost had me stand up on the set here and salute and start singing "God Bless America." But let me ask you this question, though, because I feel you on the patriotic tip, but let me ask you this: what do you say--give me your best argument to any American watching right now who wants to understand if they--if they were to support what you want and spend that kind of money, how do I benefit from this in Oklahoma, in California, in Florida and Indiana? How do I--what do I get out of this?
Nelson: Well, I won't even give you the argument I just gave, which is we are by nature explorers and we want to continue to press the bounds of exploration and knowledge. I'll give you the other argument. The fact of development of technology and the spin-offs into our everyday lives. Tavis, this very TV equipment that is recording this broadcast, a lot of it is spin-off of the space program. The modern-day miracles in an emergency room are the product of taking lightweight materials that are highly reliable in a small volume. The micro-miniaturization revolution is directly as a result of the space program, and I will add one more thing. When you do that, you get young kids energized. You get 'em interested in math and science and technology, and that produces a whole bunch of engineers that ultimately make us viable in the global marketplace. We've lost that since the early days of the space program. We need to re-engender that.
Tavis: All right, as I said earlier, you almost had me standing up saluting and singing "America the Beautiful" when you talked about the frontier, but now that you tell me that if we go back to space, I can stay on television every night, now you got me and I'm gonna support--I'm gonna support--I might send the president a letter tonight asking for more money for NASA. In the minute that I have left, though, on a serious note, tell me how likely it is in a minute that you think that what you're calling for, the president will step up and do it and that the American public will buy it as well?
Nelson: Well, he isn't doing it because he's not offering the money. No one can lead the space program except the president or the vice-president, and then they've got to be consistent, and they've got to come forward with realistic budgets, and they have to use the bully pulpit in order to get the American people behind it. Otherwise, it's gonna fizzle. So, for all of these reasons--I can tell you if I were president what I'd be doing--Tavis, I am not running for president, but that's what I'd be doing if I were president to bring this country back on its path of greatness, not only in space, but in education and healthcare and the environment, and all of the things that have been neglected.
Tavis: I appreciate that, Senator Nelson. I appreciate your coming on and being so candid with us. Thank you. You're welcome back here anytime, sir.
Nelson: Thank you, Tavis.
Tavis: My pleasure. Stay tuned. We are right back with Tom Arnold.
Back to January 23, 2004