WHY WAS THIS FUNDED?

This contract was made possible through NASA's planetary science and exploration programs, which are authorized by Congress to advance America's understanding of the solar system. NASA regularly contracts with private aerospace companies to design and build spacecraft when the agency lacks in-house manufacturing capacity.

WHAT PUBLIC PROBLEM IS IT TRYING TO SOLVE?

Scientists want to understand how the solar system formed and whether asteroids may have delivered the building blocks of life to Earth, and studying asteroid material directly is one of the best ways to answer those questions. There is also interest in understanding asteroids that could potentially pose a threat to Earth in the future.

WHO BENEFITS?

Scientists and researchers at universities and NASA centers benefit from access to rare asteroid samples that cannot be studied any other way. Aerospace workers at Lockheed Martin in Colorado and other suppliers across the country benefit from the jobs created by building and operating the spacecraft.

WHAT ARE THE RISKS?

A contract of this size and length, running from 2012 to 2027, carries risk of cost overruns, schedule delays, or technical failures that are common in complex space missions. Because the contract type is listed as unknown, it is difficult to assess how cost increases are controlled or how taxpayer exposure is managed.

WHAT HAPPENS IF FUNDING IS REMOVED?

If this contract had been cancelled, the OSIRIS-REx spacecraft would not have been built, and the asteroid samples it successfully returned to Earth in 2023 would never have been collected. Hundreds of jobs at Lockheed Martin and partner companies would have been lost, and years of scientific planning would have been wasted.

ARGUMENTS FOR

• •The mission successfully returned asteroid samples to Earth, giving scientists irreplaceable material that could reveal how life and planets formed, making it a strong return on investment.
• •Funding advanced American aerospace technology and kept skilled engineering jobs in the United States, supporting a competitive domestic space industry.
• •Studying potentially hazardous asteroids contributes to planetary defense knowledge that could one day help protect Earth from a catastrophic impact.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST

• •At $441.3 million over 15 years, critics may argue the funds could have addressed more immediate public needs like infrastructure, healthcare, or education.
• •The contract type is unknown, making it harder for the public and oversight bodies to verify whether costs were properly controlled and taxpayer money was used efficiently.
• •Some argue that deep-space science missions primarily benefit a small number of researchers and specialists, rather than delivering broad, direct benefits to everyday Americans.