July 22, 2006

NASA's Goals Delete Mention of Home Planet
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/science/22nasa.html?ei=5087%0A&en=fa3193b48b23d7be&ex=1153713600&pagewanted=print


 From 2002 until this year, NASA's mission statement, prominently featured 
in its budget and planning documents, read: "To understand and protect our 
home planet; to explore the universe and search for life; to inspire the 
next generation of explorers ... as only NASA can."

In early February, the statement was quietly altered, with the phrase "to 
understand and protect our home planet" deleted. In this year's budget and 
planning documents, the agency's mission is "to pioneer the future in space 
exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research."

David E. Steitz, a spokesman for the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration, said the aim was to square the statement with President 
Bush's goal of pursuing human spaceflight to the Moon and Mars.

But the change comes as an unwelcome surprise to many NASA scientists, who 
say the "understand and protect" phrase was not merely window dressing but 
actively influenced the shaping and execution of research priorities. 
Without it, these scientists say, there will be far less incentive to 
pursue projects to improve understanding of terrestrial problems like 
climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

"We refer to the mission statement in all our research proposals that go 
out for peer review, whenever we have strategy meetings," said Philip B. 
Russell, a 25-year NASA veteran who is an atmospheric chemist at the Ames 
Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif. "As civil servants, we're paid to 
carry out NASA's mission. When there was that very easy-to-understand 
statement that our job is to protect the planet, that made it much easier 
to justify this kind of work."

Several NASA researchers said they were upset that the change was made at 
NASA headquarters without consulting the agency's 19,000 employees or 
informing them ahead of time.

Though the "understand and protect" phrase was deleted in February, when 
the Bush administration submitted budget and planning documents to 
Congress, its absence has only recently registered with NASA employees.

Mr. Steitz, the NASA spokesman, said the agency might have to improve 
internal communications, but he defended the way the change was made, 
saying it reflected the management style of Michael D. Griffin, the 
administrator at the agency.

"Strategic planning comes from headquarters down," he said, and added, "I 
don't think there was any mal-intent or idea of exclusion."

The line about protecting the earth was added to the mission statement in 
2002 under Sean O'Keefe, the first NASA administrator appointed by 
President Bush, and was drafted in an open process with scientists and 
employees across the agency.

In the National Aeronautics and Space Act, which established the agency in 
1958, the first objective of the agency was listed as "the expansion of 
human knowledge of the earth and of phenomena in the atmosphere and space."

And since 1972, when NASA launched the first Landsat satellite to track 
changes on the earth's surface, the agency has been increasingly involved 
in monitoring the environment and as a result has been immersed in 
political disputes over environmental policy and spending, said W. Henry 
Lambright, a professor of public administration and political science at 
Syracuse University who has studied the trend.

The shift in language echoes a shift in the agency's budgets toward space 
projects and away from earth missions, a shift that began in 2004, the year 
Mr. Bush announced his vision of human missions to the Moon and beyond.

The "understand and protect" phrase was cited repeatedly by James E. 
Hansen, a climate scientist at NASA who said publicly last winter that he 
was being threatened by political appointees for speaking out about the 
dangers posed by greenhouse gas emissions.

Dr. Hansen's comments started a flurry of news media coverage in late 
January; on Feb. 3, Mr. Griffin issued a statement of "scientific openness."

The revised mission statement was released with the agency's proposed 2007 
budget on Feb. 6. But Mr. Steitz said Dr. Hansen's use of the phrase and 
its subsequent disappearance from the mission statement was "pure coincidence."

Dr. Hansen, who directs the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, a NASA 
office, has been criticized by industry-backed groups and Republican 
officials for associating with environmental campaigners and his 
endorsement of Senator John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

Dr. Hansen said the change might reflect White House eagerness to shift the 
spotlight away from global warming.

"They're making it clear that they have the authority to make this change, 
that the president sets the objectives for NASA, and that they prefer that 
NASA work on something that's not causing them a problem," he said.


================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
antunes at uh dot edu



Reply with a "Thank you" if you liked this post.
_____________________________

MEDIANEWS mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to