As a long-term supporter of space operations (government-sponsored or commercial), and with a masters degree in space systems managementI firmly believe the day-to-day business of launch operations and matured space-oriented operations should have been commercialized long ago. As a matter of history, Reagan had taken the initiative, and was completely endorsed by, very prominent and active space commercialization activitists back in the mid 80s. The government (NASA and the military services) did their part in R&D starting all the way back in the 40s and 50s, and that role needs to be continued, but performing day-to-day operations of the "space business" needs to be commercialized as much as possible. Much like aviation was intially embraced by the military services with the Wright Brothers, etc. but then quickly became a major industry in the commercial world, so should space operations. The hard part is getting the work share right (who does what between government and industry) and then fostering that relationship long enough to incubate commercial industry to take off and run with the baton. Certainly, there has to be sufficient oversight (e.g. FAA with commercial airline industry), but those capabilities are in place NOW. I was present at the inauguration of Oklahoma's spaceport at Burns Flat, OK once the FAA had officially certificated the location as a spaceport (and to my knowledge, is still the only "commercial" spaceport to be certificated as such, although I know New Mexico is nearly there or will soon get its' certificate also). The overall point is this - government serves an inherent function in space operations - but an R&D function primarily. The only roles goverment, via the military services, should maintain otherwise is a defense-related function. All else should be coordinated with commercial industry - and if the market isn't there, then so be it! There are and will be plenty of commercial industries who can do space launch operations (e.g. logistics support of the ISS, for example) much more effectively using other means other than Space Shuttle type systems, and in the intermediate to far term, much cheaper as well. From an overall budget perspective, I'm probably one of the few "proponents of space" that would say that we need to take care of things at home FIRST, then concern ourselves with space. We need to administer all of budgets wisely, and when we have serious financial issues to resolve and aren't even taking care of our own people in a cnountry with one of the world's highest standards of living (supposedly!), then priorities must be painfully addressed and budgets spent accordingly. Once things improve, then more ambitious projects can be undertaken on behalf of space exploration. The cost-benefit ratio currently in place just doesn't support expending billions of dollars to go to Mars on manned missions, etc., but that doesn't mean it won't be able to happen in the future.

I don't believe any current government program should be off the table. There certainly solid reasons for continuing a space program, but we do need to be wise and prudent in what we are trying to accomplish. All endeavors need to be thoroughly examined to determine their purpose, cost and whether they fill an actual need in science, whether health, technology, or industrial. We must not continue programs simply because we have in the past.