Hubble trouble

In a few years, we may witness a streak across the sky marking the end of the Hubble Space Telescope ("Hubble hubbub eclipses rocket science," Times, News, March 23). No doubt the Hubble must end someday, but why is NASA so prepared for euthanasia?

This telescope has been one of the scientific wonders of NASA in the past few decades and nothing comparable is set to replace it. The simple answer is that as a cash cow, the Hubble is a downer and no longer of use politically.

I'm not disparaging NASA, but its overseers. The Bush administration does not receive any benefit from science; however, it could divert billions of dollars to the space station and all of those donors (ahem, space/defense contractors). The same could be said of the push to go to Mars. There hasn't been any groundwork laid for developing the revenues and the international teams required to pursue a Mars agenda.

NASA's budget will be parsed into ever smaller bits, pushing out any items that have scientific merit in the pursuit of giving George his prize. We have seen the same sort of agenda with budgeting for Star Wars defense projects. An endless, undying project that saps money and talent from real energy and defense research, but nevertheless provides steady income with no consequences for failure.

This same tool is being used to decimate social-welfare programs such as Social Security, Medicare (only today revealed to be dipping into the reserve funds, and becoming insolvent seven years earlier than projected), education, and welfare. If you want to kill a government program, then give that agency an agenda it can't fulfill and underfund it from the beginning (just like No Child Left Behind).

Or, as the old saying goes, "If you want to hang a man, give him just enough rope and he'll do it himself." To this I would add: "Check to see who is holding the other end of that rope."

David M. Belisle's universe originates in Seattle.