Polls Response to NASA by Nixon Foundation

Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Librari'

PUBLIC OPINION POLLS

General

Comments

The polling by the various organizations and methods has not been as systematic, extensive, and frequent as could be de: sired f.ot accurate readings and it is impo.r:tant to be a\./are of thci.r lirnitaLions and to use care rn interirreting thcir

results

As r.right be expected in such com-olex issues, the wording of questions in polls have a great cjeal to do tvith the trend of the ansvlers" For exanrple, a person asked if he wants to maintain U.S. leadership in space would probably be more incl-ined to give an ansl^rer favoring an active space program than if he were asked whether he vtould like to see some cuts in space spending. Results of some poils have been vreighted abnormally for and against the space program in this manner Recent successes or failures in U.S. or Soviet space activities may sharply affect results in a given poII as noted here.

Several more specific points can be

made:

ordinary cit-i-zens are asked for approval or disapproval of such a nevr, seemingly, esoterj-c, and expensive government program as the space program" whose benefits may be largely intangible and for the nation as a rvhole rather than percent f[for the individual, approval by as few as 30 or 35 public | | should be considered significatrt and encouraging 1.

When

[ | support.

2. An oprnion that a program is "not rvorth the money" is not necessarily a conviction by that individual that it should be terminated or even cut back. Iuiany peopl.e probably wish the space program did not cost so much, but want it to continue nevertheless.

3. A frequent guestion in the polls in recent years has been whether governmeni spending on the sPace program should be kept at present levels, j-ncreased, or decreased. In

i r

t i

! !

i !

Reproduced at the Richard Nixon presrdential Library

I I

evaluat-i-ng the ansv/ers, votes for maintaining the current leve.l- and for increasing the level should aII be counted as votes in favor of the space program.

4. Public opinion on ner^J space prograrfts for the Seventies cannot be measured accurately or reliably predicted on the

Pul:Iie opini<in on t:hc niY/ Frogtril:Yt, catr he bacis of, oIO pollc. juclged fairly only after the nevr ,orograms have been laid before the country with sci-redules, Fosts" and supporting argufile,rts by the President and other national Ieaders.

5. It can be safely predicted on the basis of available polls, hovrever, that there are substantial reservoirs of. support and opposition for continuing a major space effort aimed at continued U.S. Ieadership in the field. Recent pubtig _Opiniog Surv-ey,s

Slro--u

Subst-anlipl;9qpp.gst

Recent public opinion surveys by the Gal-lup PoIIo the Harris Survey, and Trendexo Inc., have shorvn substantial support for NASA space prograrns. ThS callup_Eg1l in ,fanuary 1969 asked: The Ir.S. is now spending many billions of dollars on space research. Do you think v;e should j-ncrease these funds, keep them the samer or reduce these funds?

Increase L4%i Keep them the same 4L%. Reduce 4O%. Thus 55% of the respondents wanted space funds maintained or increased. The Harris Surge.y in June 1969 asked: Do you favor or opPose the space project aim of landing a man on the moon?

Favor

5L%

Oppose 4L%"

The latest T.rend-ex Survey in October 1968 asked: As you know,

the United States is involved in a very competitive race to be first j.n space exploration, and the government has a program to put a man on the moon by 1970. Are you in favor of this program?

Yes

68%

2L%.

Reproduce<j at the Richard Nixon presidential Library

in October 1968 also asked: Do you think the governrnent is spending enough, spending too rnuch, or not spending enough on the space exploration program?

Thc.

T'r:e

ndcj< .S.u-rveJ

Enough 42%" Too rnuch 35%. Not enough LB%" Thus 60% of the respondents wanted space funds rnaj.ntained or

i"ncrcascd.

Note; The Gallup and Harrid polis cited are publisheo j-n the nelrspapers as syndicated features. The Trendex poII is sponsored by the Thiokol Cheinical Corporation"

I I

I !

Reprotluced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library

<:.\,-..,.1! I :rll..

.tr

al ?:-c;'rdex-Q1ivg;1g (for Thiokol Chei-.ticaI Corporation): /\

There f;urr'eys are partj.cularly valuilble because the sar:e two b3sic qrrcii;ons h,:ve been askeci tit 10 different times fron 1!5J to 195S"

thc unitod li*atos ls lnvolvcd j-n a vc1'y !,,rj]iti:onr As you knou/r 'r,hc govelnrient i"r+*,f.tlve r;,rce to be first in space e::plo::atio,':, and' you ln favor of this hrrs a prof,i.an to put a man on tho moon by l97O".A.rc

p::ograrn?

Oct ScP Jan Nov Jun Se.o Sep Fcb Sep JuI 1968 t967 1957 1g66 \g55,tg6i L);Lr t)61" t961 i955

58 51 21 15 No No Opinion 11 14 Yes /"

77 24 5

59 71 '77 59 64 'g 27 ?' '2o 25 1t 19 4416)21

51 19

Notes: The Oct 1g5B sursey (yes 5O%) uas me-de alter the first nanned Apollo flight. The Jirn 1967 survey was rnade just before the Apo11o fire, and thre Sep 1967 survey was rnade seven rnonths afier the fire; the Yes vote dropped fron 71y'" to )7'f,,the lo\{est figure in the five-year series. The highest Yes vote (77y', in Sep 7955) r,re.s tal<en efter the B-day flight of Gemini ). .Qucstio4i Do you think the governincn" is spending enough, spendi-ng too ;-rch, oI. not spending enough on the space explo::ati-on progruo?

Oct Sep Jan Nov Jun Sep Sep Feb Sep

Lg68 L961 t967 1966 L966 L96> 1954 1.954 L95)

nend i nq riricn ioo

trf

U98"ERo"di'u

Effil$L's S

opinion

65 5'-

7 5

I+

51 4l 10 i4 Ll r.4 B9 \

JUI

t96'

Reproduced at the Richard Nixon

= --.--presidential

t,ibran,

t./'..

'_ -

<--6

>o:

* '': c- r, (J -c-

u9,n

;.1

o\ (r)

t'<

.L*

UF. \.*/L

<yu

ZZQ

-{J

;>) >.)* -^62

z*o

Or.uJ<\ -

j:ca

ZQ -r,Z-

iio :fUO !-u-i

--9;

..{

.r{ q0 6,.a Or{ c}Fq

{co{

i .9i o

rl0

I I

{

)

Z tl.t U d

ru o-

oo oo.

o \o

I I i

l i I

*s s.'i *rL ilElr:-li

.o o-

LL'

rt,

iil

t.t

;il --il

.o o-

LI,,

:ll

O tn

r/)

-t0

ill

i\ i\,,,

t--

r a i

\ t$f

LL'

!\r fl- ti l0

t/lu-

t.rJ

--llil

rs_S

t-. VI

<oc

PA. q-{ t

)^G z \) ct .<

Z UJ

.o .o

zf\lj :tl ./il : iI sr aeR.[f si:li

t{h od

Ofit-Z-zZ v=o

(./)

B E

It0

-alt)

i.\ .o

'\1

*il lj

re?

?s -t\

v)O/

4-t F:O rnQ5

/_\

I I

)Y:t

010

I I I

c .4

)

-; <r: orY (,, {) r,. r-.. 'rLnF

titt

) -. a- i':

tr, \

.(. c- c-

o(o

co 'o ,_ LJ \,

C.t

r^O u- (J --

uo 1Lt -l

r*6

C. tll

cr,

c) .s

C, CO

l'l ll lr

N iit ,

o C*

-r\ij o

f')

LL'

Vr I I

{; I

i I

I I I

Reproduced at tlie Richard Nixon Presrdential t.ibrary

rnS_:.-lg:j,

Sur-v"y_

rui-]1re

rn scr:temJ:er L967, Trendex asked this guesiion: After the u-s. Astronauts have landed successfurry on the mocn and retu;:ned safely, which of the forlov.ring r^:ourd you prefer us to oo in our space program? Corrtirrue effo::ts to be first Stop a1l future exploration

Don't know Ygu-lg

space

sa% L4%

36% l

!S o_n_s, CoJ l_.eSG: cr-a..dsa,! s F *SllpJo qI,c_

rg gLqni

Polrs by Garrr.rp, Harris, and Trendex have a1r shonn that younger persons are more likely to support the space plrogram than order persons, and that persons rvith a colrege education are more likery to support the prograrn than persons vrith less education. Here are some exanqol-es. In a ca_11_rlp*.Po11 in .fanuai:y L969, -lO% of the respondents with a college education wanted to maintain or increase space spendingj compared wj-th 59% forthose r+ith oni-y a high schoor education and 38% f.or those wiih only a grade school education.

I I

rn the same poIl, 63% of persons aged 20 to 39 vranted to maintain or increase space spending, whire only 44% of those over 5O wished to do so.

In a llar:ris Sur.ve.y in Januarlz 1969, 62% of. the respondents wh<> have attended college favored landing a man on the moon, while onry 37% w..t]n a high school ecjucation and 19% with a gracle school education favored this" In the same survey, SL% of the respondents under 35 favored landing a man on the moon, but only 2g% of the responclents over 50 did. In a Tre.n_d-ex Fu-rvey in October 1968 , 7g% of. the respondents rvith a colrege education favored the luna:: raadrng program, rvhile onry 63% of those vrho had not attendeil correEe favored it. In the

same survey

o 82% of those under 35 favored the lunar i I

t I

Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Libran,

lanciing, r+hi1e oniy

62%

of those over 35 favored it.

: In L967, about 3L% of. the U.S. population vras in the 20-1+4 age bracket, and 30% in the 45 and over b;acket.

N=o!_e

Ssl-j:u-!-q-U-*er*l1sls--Ui:sjpr. Results of a Gallup Poll on sending men to ltars vrere published on August 6, L969, and attre.cteC conside::able attention. D.ir:i.ng the last lveek of JuIy, the GaIIup Pol-l asked l_,517 adults in various parts of the count::y this quesLion: There has been much discussion about atteinpting to land a man on the planet Mars. Ilovr would you feel about such an at,terrrpt-*rvould you favor or oppose the united staies setting aside money for such a project? The results:

In favor

39%

Opposed

53%

opinion

story about this poll said: "PoII Finds Pub1ic CooI to Ilars Trip. "

The Nevr York

TiJne_s

headline on

a ne\7s

on the basis of the figures, the Tif,rss headline may have been well justified. But the fact that 39 pe::cent of the persons questioned came out in favor of funding a liars landing prograin at this tine is notervo::thy and encoulraging. for these j:easons:

1. A liars landing is not now an approved NASA Droglram; pubric discussion of it has been on a tentative basis onry; and the fulI vreight of support has not been evidenced. rt woul.d seem that the 39 .oercenc su,oport for it is spontaneou.s grass roots support. 2. Current NASA estimates of ti-re feasibility and cost of such a mission in the early 1980s are proi:ab1y no'c rvidely knorvn; current studies indicate thai such a rnission v.,ou]d be "easi-er" and less costly tiran many people realize; previous *oublic discussion has tended to stress the great difficulty and high cost.

! i

Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presrdential Libran,

I j

I t !

:iI I

3. In the Gallup PoIl in question, 52 pel:cent of the :spondents with college education and 54 percent of the :spondents aged 2L to 29 were in favor of the Ma::s mission, rnsistent with past Polls.

t : I

ii I l

4. f n a Gallup PoIl- in ltay 1961, befo're President :r:-,edy's recomrnendation of the lunar ianding goa1, onllz one :rscn in three favored such a missiotr. Thus the percentage support for the I{ars mission is higher. f initial :l many !/ays, advocates of i Mars landing prograrn could be ieased r,vith the "v/arm" response evinced in thrs pol1. cuse *Comrni.ttee Survev: su::vey of the views of leading U.S. industrial executives not aerospace) made for the Coirrmittee on Science and Astro-

autics of the llouse of Representatives in i95B shor,ved that bout 48% thought expenditures on the space lorograrn about ighti 6% thought thern too little; and 37% thought them too uch

hus a clear majority of 5zt% thought expenditures rrere about ight or should be increased. onqressi-onaI Polls:

he foJ-lovring are the results of sorne recent pol1s of contituents taken by meinbers of the iicuse of Rep::esentatives nd pubi-ished in the Conq,ressronal- Recor:c']. (eolts in which espondents are asked to rank space in priori-ty lisis of arious programs have not been included. ) Five of the L2 olls listed show a rnajority in favor of the space progr:am. he others indicate substantial suppor-t for the soace program t a time of emphasis on cutting back governnent spending in eneral. Seven of the L2 Congressmen voted f.or the !Y 1970 Two voted no on the bill- despite a ASA Autho'ctzation BilI. ajority vote by their constituents in favo:: of the space rogram. Three voted yes on the bil-I despite a minority vote or the space prograrn in their pol1s.

I _ _-.-