MARS: 50th anniversary of Moon landing as the goal of landing men on Mars is a reasonable timing, but we should make sure people understand that this mission’s purpose is NOT the same as that of Apollo program. Purpose is something we must clearly define and make known to all the participants (citizens of Earth) before we initiate any activity. If we are to benefit all people of Earth, there is no reason America works on the Mars expedition alone. We must never allow such limited, close-minded proposal to proceed: the venture to Mars must be a global project. Even though the cost of "human" mission is very high, I feel that human visit of a promising place like Mars will return unimaginable excitement. And excitement is what we are ultimately looking for in our lives.

THEME: Theme should be more universal and should relate to every aspect of space exploration. Although discovery of extraterrestrial life will be one of the most exciting events, life is not the only thing worth investigating in this vast universe. The same holds true with planets. A large scale agency like NASA should work on a broad range of programs to meet the interests of various people supporting it. While Administrator Goldin’s idea is not a bad one for inexpensive program, I feel that projects of a big agency should have more variety even if each is not large. (This is unless one particular topic is of interest to the whole. Search of life-bearing planets is not likely to draw so much interest of 'general' public until we find one...) We will be able to partly solve the difficulty of keeping up the budget for numerous projects by establishing an Earth-wide space agency with big funding.

SCIENCE: NASA should put an appropriate amount of work on each of the areas of pure science and applied science according to the people’s interests (This must be why you are asking this question). Also, in order to meet varied interests, it should not focus on just one of the fields. Because I become most excited when learning about astrophysics, I’m personally more interested in exploration of unknown and pure scientific research.

STRATEGY: I do not understand why NASA wants to go on with just one strategy. A big agency should be flexible, and it should adjust the size of each mission for the maximum efficiency. Still, very ambitious missions often bring about greater and ‘long-lasting’ excitement than more frequent but less ambitious missions.

MERIT: Why did NASA give up its budget so readily? I believe there are a lot of other agencies that should be receiving less federal funding; one of them, I feel, is the "un-peaceful" military. •Anyway, Earth observation is indispensable because it is directly beneficial, influential, and often exciting. •Space station should have a big priority, too, because it will surely enhance the cooperation among nations. Considering the progress of this project, we should never jeopardize the International Space Station; this program will have positive effect not only scientifically but also socially, politically, and probably economically. •If the targets of robotic missions span wider than just "planets", I would place the next highest priority on it. The variety of interesting objects and phenomena in space to investigate would be limitless. •Human missions to Moon or Mars will be the most exciting of all. We will need to devise a very solid plan negotiated by the entire Earth with clear purpose before any need for spending comes. We should not eliminate this program, but I think we would take a while to reach a global agreement about every specific of this big mission plan. •Funding for asteroid detection should come from defense spending even if NASA conducts the study. This will be a reasonable and logical way to help with NASA’s budget and to spend the military’s budget effectively. •Space shuttles will probably be unnecessary as the space station and SSTO vehicles become operational. We have to think of how to make good use of the shuttles--maybe for space tourism for very wealthy people.

SETI: Our exposure to extraterrestrial existence will be extremely EXciting! -- even if it was like the aliens in the Independence Day! Analyzing the patterns in the signals and finding out their meanings would be even more fascinating. By receiving every type of wavelengths, collected data could lead to unexpected discovery (if not of intelligence) or it could be valuable to astronomers. To be more focused and efficient, SETI should include the search of extra-Solar planets capable of supporting life proposed by Administrator Goldin.

ASTEROIDS: I would not support too much of additional funding for asteroid tracking unless the resources come from the enormous defense spending. I am not quite sure that preventing collisions with asteroids would be that difficult. Maybe it is. If we cannot detect the coming asteroid very quickly, we would have a great opportunity to use up some of the nuclear arsenals that this "civilized" world has! (Intelligent beings should not fight physically.)

PEOPLE: "It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us that we here highly resolve that this universe shall have a new birth of freedom, and that space science programs of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." There is every reason that "our" space programs be carried out "by the people" because it is essentially "for the people". Almost all the space agencies today are governmental, but "government" should also be of, by, and for the people.

ADVOCATE: Space is a unique place; and that’s what makes it attractive. Just about everyone on Earth would become interested in space -- but only if he/she is informed enough to realize its uniqueness and its exciting features. While groups of people like The Planetary Society should push hard on government to promote space programs, space enthusiasts should first let the other people feel the excitement of space exploration. I’m sure that’s what you and other supporting organizations have been working on. The best way to spread the excitement would be by capturing greater coverage on popular media especially television, newspapers, and radio. I am not quite sure how to do this or how these media work, but I am sure that people (including I) do not see or hear enough about space exploration. Once enough people are interested, convincing the government ("for the people") will be easier. When we have to be critical, we must also be reasonable and open-minded, remembering that people are interested in many other things as well -- we must still strongly criticize people with such interests as gaining money and power!