http://www.nss.org/

Not only do they have the alert about the Mars language, but they have this:

“NSS Legislative ALERT: Private Property Rights in Space in Serious Jeopardy!

The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee has passed the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty and it is now heading to the Senate floor for a vote. It can be voted on any day now. Please help stop the Senate from ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST).”

There’s a lot more in the link they provide after that about the precedent the treaty would have for the Moon Treaty, which they are against.

Please reread my post. It’s a complaint about where Congressional attention is focused, not about Ares I/Orion issues. Even if Ares I/Orion were going well, Congress’s (and the White House’s) attention needs to be focused first and foremost on those ten billion dollar-class development programs, not million dollar-class technology research programs. Our political leadership has lost the forest for the trees when it comes to NASA, which is just bad governance.

To back up my complaint about our congressional representatives, I did link to and summarize an article about yet another technically driven schedule slip on Ares I. But it was just an example, and not the point of the post.

FWIW…

Why must you turn every single thread into a gripe about Orion and Ares?

I was disappointed with a recent NSS statement that mentioned the Earth sciences programs. The basic attitude was “yeah more could be done, but there’s plenty of missions planned.” I felt it largely ignored the damage Bush has done to Earth sciences, especially environmental monitoring crucial to understanding climate change. It was too close to the administration’s line, which I think has been fundamentally dishonest on climate change for going on seven years now.

You are correct that the Ares 1 problems are much larger … but they are also much more difficult to solve (NSS generally avoids issues that would have NSS criticize NASA … they are willing to criticize Cogress, but bend over backwards to avoid criticizing NASA.)

In NSS favor – the Mars issue is relatively simple & straightforward and comparatively easy to solve. And it might be important some day. I don’t mind NSS focusing on this.

– Al

PS — IF anybody does not believe me about NSS not being willing to criticize NASA — what do you want to bet that NSS will not criticize NASA for its position this week on planetary defense (we can only afford $4M/year, even though Congress told is, in law, in 2005 to make this a bigger priority). NSS has no real excuse, since NSS is an advocate of planetary defense.

I don’t know why NSS isn’t really sounding the alarm on that. They are more tied into what’s going on with NASA and in DC than most people. Surely they must understand what’s happening.

They seem to be largely silent on these bigger issues, unless I’m missing something. Are they hoping things turn around? Are they reluctant to criticize Griffin and the administration?

OK, I am French, so maybe I am misunderstanding, but apparently it says that the funds should not be used for things exclusively related to human exploration of Mars. Strictly, that does also mean that these funds could be used for things related to Mars and other things, like the Moon, no?
So what seems forbidden is only an exclusive manned Mars logic, while a Moon-Mars one still remain possible. Your advice on this?

See my blog: Congressional games with Mars exploration @ http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=129320645&blogID=314674206&Mytoken=65E2E13C-943A-48EC-AD824D49B7895E1031276778

It includes the actual language and a link to the House Approved bill.