[X] My Assistant

[elakdawalla]

The Planetary Society has issued a call to action, for people to contact House Science Committee Chairman Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) to demand that NASA not cut their 2006 spending on science priorities like Europa before their 2007 budget has even taken effect; and to demand that they reconsider their priorities in the 2007 budget. Go to our Space Advocacy page for more on how to participate in this campaign. Please participate!

--Emily

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

Cpurtesy of (grrr) Keith Cowing: the Planetary Science Institute has polled 1024 planetary scientists to find out just what they want done with the money the program DOES have available right now:
http://www.psi.edu/~sykes/prioritysurvey/results.html

The results are both clear and interesting. There is very strong agreement with what Andy Dantzler told Congress: R&A funds come first, then small (Discovery and Mars Scout) missions, then medium ones (New Frontiers), with Flagship missions as a whole (at the rate one per decade) being lowest priority. BUT: there is also overwhelming enthusiasm (73%) for skipping the next 1 or 2 Discovery AOs plus the next New Frontiers AO to fly ONE near-future Flagship mission.

Obvious next question: do the scientists want that one near-future Flagship to be Europa Orbiter (as currently planned), or something else?

[Bob Shaw]

Bruce:

Look on the bright side - the MEPAG folk talk to *you*!

Bob Shaw

[Guest_BruceMoomaw_*]

Bruce:

Look on the bright side - the MEPAG folk talk to *you*!

Bob Shaw

Which brings me to a point Emily isn't going to like -- in that "open" E-mail Bruce Betts sent her on MEPAG's April meeting, he didn't tell her a single goddamn thing that hasn't already been openly known for months. See http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meeting/nov-05/M...irmans_ltr1.pdf and http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/Mars_Pro..._SAG_Report.doc . The only reason I got anything before those two public reports came out is because they DID send an emissary to the simultaneous COMPLEX meeting in November, and I was there to overhear him.

I suggest that Emily and I try simultaneously to pry open this oyster and actually get some new information about the things MEPAG discussed at the April meeting and the conclusions they reached.

[elakdawalla]

Which brings me to a point Emily isn't going to like -- in that "open" E-mail Bruce Betts sent her on MEPAG's April meeting, he didn't tell her a single goddamn thing that hasn't already been openly known for months...

Bruce, I work for Bruce Betts, which sometimes gets me more insight, but sometimes less. That is, I have to pick my battles, and I've got other stuff I'm waiting on him for. Feel free to pester him for more information. A phone call will probably get more progress (i.e. he can't put off a reply to a phone call until tomorrow...and tomorrow...and tomorrow...) He's up to his neck in preparations for the upcoming ISDC meeting and is more than usually procrastinatory these days.

As for that inexplicable NASAwatch comment about "finally allowing taxpayer insight," Lou and Bruce have been going to MEPAG for years. I'll be going to both OPAG and VEXAG.

--Emily

[mcaplinger]

As for that inexplicable NASAwatch comment about "finally allowing taxpayer insight," ...

Uh-oh, this remark has gotten you in trouble with Cowing again

It seems we have a mole here, unless Cowing is a member.