FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
No more Americans on the moon - at least not now.
The Orlando Sentinel reports that when President Obama releases his budget proposal Monday, there will be no money for the Constellation program - which was supposed to return humans to the moon by 2020.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/01/28/art.moon.jpg caption=""]
Also on the chopping block will be plans to develop a new rocket to replace the space shuttle; and a new cargo rocket - meant to launch supplies and fuel that would one day be needed to extend human life beyond earth's orbit.
In place of the planned moon landing program, the administration is touting what it calls a "very significant program." And insists that canceling the moon plans doesn't mean the president is abandoning exploration and human spaceflight.
Officials point to a new $6 billion project to develop commercial rockets that could take astronauts into orbit. They're calling on American companies to get involved and help develop private space taxis.
And they say this is all part of a larger plan to increase NASA's budget by about $1.3 billion annually over the next five years to increase research and development and extend the life of the International Space Station, among other things.
But - no mention of developing a so-called heavy-lift rocket capable of taking humans beyond the space station.
Here’s my question to you: Should NASA's plans to return to the moon be scrapped for budgetary reasons?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Humanity's future lies in space. Returning to the moon and establishing a permanent presence there is a must.
R.A. from Danville, California writes:
NASA has advanced science a bunch. Our quality of life is better because of our efforts to push into space. Returning to the moon (and eventually going to Mars) will benefit our country more than either of the wars in the Middle East.
Hi Jack, I think it should be cut. It's important, but there are more important issues now, and budgeting means making tough decisions in favor of the highest priorities.
Randy from Japan writes:
The next man on the moon will not be American. Probably Chinese or Indian.
John from Virginia writes:
Jack, Yes, I think the funds can be better spent at home. The moon has been around for a very long time and will be around for quite some time to come. Maybe in the future we'll have more efficient "green" ways to get there and continue research. Going to the moon is a desirable, not a mandatory.
Yep. I rather we use that money we give to NASA on meaningful things like health care and education instead of giving it to NASA to look for E.T. If we want to find E.T., just ask Dick Cheney where he is. E.T. is his brother.
David from Charlotte, North Carolina writes:
Not entirely. Just develop a one-way ship that will accommodate Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and a few others in Congress. Then NASA can turn its attention to other things.
Since the first lunar landings, there have been many conspiracies saying it was all done in the Arizona desert and that they never did go to the moon. Why not just go to Arizona and film it? Save all that money.