Mars or Bust

In last night's YouTube Republican presidential debate on CNN, a member of The Mars Society asked if any of the candidates would pledge to put a man on Mars by 2020. None did, and only two replied to the question. One of those, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado said that, given the budget problems of the federal government, we can't afford to send a man to Mars.

Mr. Tancredo may have wanted to present himself as a hard-eyed fiscal realist willing to take unpopular stands with that response, but it's at least as much short-sighted as it is hard-eyed. In dealing with the budget problems over the next few years, failing to establish the broad outlines of a hopeful future beyond those few years would be a mistake. American leadership in the world rests on a few pillars. One of those is a technological edge in critical areas. A manned Mars program would help maintain that edge-- and do so in a nonthreatening, even inspirational, way. The cost of such a program is probably less than Mr. Tancredo believes, as well. The amount spent in one year in Iraq, spread over twenty to thirty years, could well do the job, sparking scientific and technological progress alomg the way. If America undertook such a program with partners, the cost to the American taxpayer would be further reduced.

The Mars Society supports the "Mars Direct" plan of its founder, Dr. Robert Zubrin. That plan would, if it worked, put humans on Mars quickly and relatively inexpensively-- hence the 2020 date. Mars Direct, however, would ignore putting a base on the Moon. That could be a long-term mistake, as well.