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?

Thread moved to appropriate sub-forum.

It's manned exploration only:

"The bill language also continues a moratorium prohibiting NASA from implementing a reduction in force and from funding any research, development or demonstration activity related exclusively to Human Exploration of Mars."

(from http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=22822 )

Thank you, Bjorn.

Really?

NASA Mars Program Threatened by Senate Funding Bill
http://www.planetary.org/news/2007/0703_NA..._by_Senate.html

It appears that the entire sum will be taken out of the Mars exploration budget, including $20 million from funds supporting the Mars Exploration Rovers. This could force NASA to shut down the Mars rovers at the end of the current fiscal year!

This rather flies in the face of what Alan said on the Vic-Crater Teleconf a few days ago, saying that he was specifically looking to get more of out existing spacecraft.

Doug

We will indeed get more from the efforts we have. Watch what we do, ala EPOXI and NExT in Discovery. Watch MSL... Watch the rovers, they will continue. Watch us with ExoMars. Action speaks louder than words. Watch.

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.

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.

Quoting from NASA-WATCH

http://www.nasawatch.com/

"Planetary Society Arm Waving?
"NASA Mars Program Threatened by Senate Funding Bill, Planetary Society

"It appears that the entire sum will be taken out of the Mars exploration budget, including $20 million from funds supporting the Mars Exploration Rovers. This could force NASA to shut down the Mars rovers at the end of the current fiscal year!"

"Editor's note: "It appears" and "could force"? Sorry Lou, that's not quite what I am hearing from NASA and elsewhere here in Washington. While the Senate did take $30 million out of Mars reserves, the House did not do this in their version of the bill and between subsequent conference action on this bill and inherent flexibility within NASA's Mars program, this is not expected to be present in the final Appropriations bill. "

end quote.

That reminds me, we had delicious Italian sausages on the grill for our July 4th BBQ.

Bizmark was a much more astute and subtle politician than he's been stereotyped to be, following a couple of world wars involving Germany.