1. United States
2. R.I.
3. Letter

I am writing as a taxpayer and citizen who holds a strong belief in public science, democratic accountability, and the responsible utilization of federal funds. I respectfully request that you advocate for an immediate review, suspension, and eventual termination of all federal contracts with SpaceX, including those administered through NASA, the Department of Defense, and other federal agencies. Additionally, I urge support for increased taxation of Elon Musk and his enterprises, rather than continued subsidization with public resources. The primary issue is not the importance of space exploration, which is undeniable. NASA's role and the value of public science are well established. The concern lies in the federal government permitting a private corporation owned by a billionaire to position itself as indispensable to national interests. Simultaneously, taxpayers are subjected to significant financial, environmental, and ethical risks. This situation does not exemplify innovation serving the public interest; rather, it reflects a privatized ambition financed with public funds. SpaceX has been presented to the American public as a pioneering technological enterprise. However, the contracting model surrounding it increasingly resembles a taxpayer-funded scheme: the public bears the costs, the billionaire's brand grows, environmental impacts are externalized, and long-term risks are shifted onto society. I encourage you, as my congressional representative, to introduce a motion in Congress to end this arrangement. There are multiple reasons to halt federal contracts with SpaceX and to impose higher taxes on Elon Musk and his companies, rather than providing subsidies at taxpayer expense. Firstly, no billionaire requires public subsidies. An individual who manages companies valued at enormous sums should not be considered in need of government underwrite. Public funds should serve societal needs such as education, healthcare, climate resilience, infrastructure, veteran support, housing, food security, scientific research, and environmental restoration. Allocating billions of dollars to a billionaire-led corporation constitutes a political choice favoring private accumulation over public welfare. Secondly, NASA’s own research indicates that human travel to Mars remains medically and ethically unresolved. Space radiation presents a significant hazard; shielding against galactic cosmic radiation is limited and complex. The associated risks include increased incidences of cancer, cardiovascular issues, neurological effects, and other long-term health consequences. Promoting Mars as a future destination while these hazards remain unaddressed is not visionary but reckless. Thirdly, the rhetoric surrounding Mars colonization distracts from the only habitable planet we currently possess. Humanity lacks the technology, infrastructure, ethical frameworks, and medical protections necessary to make Mars a viable refuge. Promoting such fantasies should not weaken our commitment to repairing and preserving Earth. The federal government should not subsidize corporate narratives that encourage the public to consider abandoning this planet. Until the fundamental barriers of radiation, life support, ecology, and ethics are overcome, policy should prioritize Earth's stewardship. Fourth, the environmental implications of space exploration and launch activities, along with the long-term sustainability of such ventures, warrant careful consideration. These activities pose risks to Earth's environment through pollution, resource consumption, and space debris accumulation. Public policy must rigorously assess and address these environmental concerns to ensure responsible stewardship of our planet and its surrounding space.