[X] My Assistant

[monitorlizard]

Nasawatch.com has just posted a news item entitled "Senate Subcommittee Approves 2008 Funds for Energy, Justice" with the following statement:

"unlike the House bill, the Senate version does not include language blocking NASA from pursuing exploration of Mars"

I was shocked when I first read this, but then thought that they are most likely referring to HUMAN exploration of Mars (Project Constellation). Even that would be a disappointment if the block were to be successful (funding for manned Mars planning would be so low at this point that one wonders why Congress would even bother to ban it). Still, the superficial interpretation of the statement is that all Mars exploration would be blocked. It would be a relief to have confirmation that the House is not trying to eliminate unmanned Mars exploration. Anyone have further info?

[lyford]

Sometimes I wonder if these budget machinations are all part of the negotiation process: of course one can't pull the plug on the those mission... but perhaps the threat of doing so helps move things forward.

It's kind of like the oblique way we seem to fund things here locally - no one wants to cut the budget for police and fire departments, and will always seem to come through when they are threatened. So the more vulnerable parks and libraries budgets get spared the axe in the noise of the resulting debate.

This is why I should never consider a political career -

PS - Alan, while it's true that actions speak louder than words, but I personally give your words much respect.

[mcaplinger]

Sometimes I wonder if these budget machinations are all part of the negotiation process: of course one can't pull the plug on the those mission... but perhaps the threat of doing so helps move things forward.

Of course it's part of the process. This is usually called the "Washington Monument Strategy", supposedly because when the National Park Service is threatened with cutbacks, they say they will have to curtail access to that first.