So the question for the uninformed space public outside of this discussion forum, and I imagine for the members of Congress, is going to be which is the real March Storm this year? The SFF that started it, or its offspring, ProSpace, which took over the name and built it up? I suspect most of the current members of Congress will associate it with the latter since the former is ancient history in terms of Congressional memory.

Given that, and given that the SFF is not suppose to be a lobby organization, as you noted above, then the answer to this issue should be easy. Let ProSpace go ahead with March Storm on its own and the SFF quietly bows out. Issue over.

Or let the egos take over and make the current mess worst.

In any case it will be interesting to see which path the leadership decides to follow.

“why cant we all just get along?”

Robert G. Oler

Anon,

The reason the Foundation proposed to pick up the name “March Storm” was not as nefarious as it sounds. What we have is a “failure to communicate”.

A few facts are in order.

1) The Space Frontier Foundation participated in the first March Storm (1995) and managed/led the second March Storm (1996). The 1996 March Storm was wildly successful, with 40 citizen-volunteers (called “March Stormers”) and over 200 congressional briefings, plus a $25 million line created for “RLV Technology Development” in the USAF’s DOD appropriation. As a result, the decision was made to create a new organization (a 501-c4, not-for-profit lobbying group) to manage this lobbying activity as it might subject the Space Frontier Foundation to losing its 501-c3 status.

2) ProSpace was created in the Summer of 1996, and produced/managed its first March Storm since in 1997 (the third March Storm).

ProSpace was at its peak in effectiveness in the late 1990s, when it routinely brought over 50 “March Stormers” to Capitol Hill to brief well over 200 congressional offices each year in just this one event. In the late 1990s, ProSpace always followed the March Storms with a second event in the same year (which were called “June Monsoons” or “May Breezes”, depending on the month they happened), and also routinely organized many other “legislative action alerts” during the year (asking prospace citizens to make phone calls, or write letters on very specific and targeted subjects).

During these years, ProSpace produced major “measurable” progress on prospace related legislation and policies, from increases in investments in reusable launch vehicle technology, to the passage of the Commercial Space Act of 1998, to financial support for space solar power. By specific measures, ProSpace was one of the most effective grassroots space policy groups in the nation.

3) The ProSpace MarchStorm has been slowly declining in energy and effectiveness for quite a few years.

The 2008 MarchStorm had less than 20 participants and briefed less than 100 Members of Congress. This was the smallest MarchStorm that ProSpace has ever managed. The only March Storm that was smaller was the very first March Storm, before anybody in the space community had ever managed a private grassroots citizens-managed lobbying event.

Then, the March Storm for 2009 was cancelled.

Fast forward to the present …

4) ProSpace’s website recently stated that the 2010 March Storm was cancelled, as well. (This has since been changed, as it was a mistake.)

5) Reading the ProSpace website, it can be understood why some Space Frontier Foundation members, who presumably felt disenchanted with ProSpace leadership (and the lack of results from recent years), might decide to pick up the baton, and organize a 2010 March Storm.

Does that mean that the Space Frontier Foundation are bad people?

No.

Does it mean they should have picked up the phone, and asked ProSpace leadership to confirm that ProSpace was cancelling the “March Storm”.

Absolutely. This would have prevented the misunderstandings, as well as airing of the dirty laundry.

Now that this dirty-laundry has been exposed, hopefully both sides will pick up the phone and talk, and stop the dueling press releases (which does neither side any good) and focus their limited resources on being effective advocates on Capitol Hill.

Ideally, they will come to some sort of amicable agreement, and work together again. If not, and if they both choose to organize separate grassroots lobbying events, then prospace citizen activists with an interest in their issues will have a choice of where to commit their time and energy.

Competition is good. It is possible that this “competition” is exactly what ProSpace’s current leadership needs to energize it to become effective once again.

FWIW,

– CATS

Then what was the $400 million wasted on Constellation in the Recovery Act? Woman, liquor, or coke?

“and then turns around and tells the kids that they can’t go to college because now economies have to be made.”

The metaphor doesn’t fit. The taxpayers’ money is spent on the same departments and agencies, regardless of whether the spending was before, within, or after the Recovery Act. The appropriate metaphor would be spending all your money on women, liquor, and coke, and then having to cut back on women, liquor, and coke.

“The trick, of course, is to point out how a space program, adequatly funded and adequately run, can… jump start economic growth.”

How? Space hardware development takes years. How is that going to “jump start economic growth” on any timeframe relevant to the current recession?

And we’ve already tried it, anyway. The Recovery Act included $1B for NASA. There’s no evidence it’s had any impact on the economy. NASA doesn’t even claim such on its Recovery Act website.

http://www.nasa.gov/recovery/

FWIW…

“As for the latter, Obama reminds me of the parent who blows his money on women, liquor, and coke and then turns around and tells the kids that they can’t go to college because now economies have to be made.”

LOL that statement from you would have more validity if you had equally made it about Bush. Bush took a SURPLUS of federal tax revenue and not only lost that, but ran up a considerable national debt doing the things you claim Obama has done. The cash spent on Iraq/Afland, stupid homeland security stuff, the prescription drug thing, tax cuts for Limbaugh etc…not to mention the TARP all were an orgy of spending which “blew” not only a lot of cash but because of how ineptly it was done, blew a lot of possibilities for a better future.

That includes BTW the Ares program you so love.

9 billion dollars…9 billion dollars

While that is small change compared to a trillion plus for wars of choice in Iraq and Afland…it is ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLL (grin) the money that was available to replace the shuttle.

9 billion dollars.

You predicted at the time it would have a lot of commercial spending to it. 9 billion dollars

What would it have bought had it been programed correctly? Well Musk is about to fly the Falcon 9 and a dragon mockup and he has spent less the 1 billion dollars.

Bush and company had the chance with the loss of Columbia to really change the course of the US space program. Instead they programed in 9 billion dollars which has done just about nothing.

So while I agree that Obama’s spending to this point has not been wise…at least I will label both administrations spending as poor. You on the other hand clutch the reed of Ares as if it is some magic wand against a Chinese threat you and other right wingers have made up…and defend big government programs to the hilt. See I tend to think that unless one is in France government jobs are less important then private ones.

The trick is to point out how a space program that is in all respects different from the one you have blindly supported and which has spent 9 billion dollars for nothing…would create real American (read private) jobs, jump start small business, and open the environment of space to American firms to help create the economies of the future.

BTW the context of the quote of mine that you used…labeled both administrations as big spenders and for nothing.

try and be honest I know not being that way is a trait of the right wing

Robert G. Oler

Glad to see that Oler is now being honest about his cheap shots.

As for the latter, Obama reminds me of the parent who blows his money on women, liquor, and coke and then turns around and tells the kids that they can’t go to college because now economies have to be made.

The trick, of course, is to point out how a space program, adequatly funded and adequately run, can not only help to enhance national security but also jump start economic growth.

Why?

Unless one is the chef who stepped off the fantail drunk (and survived) or Leo and Kate the reality is that the water is going to win.

None of the space activist groups are thinking in survival mode…ie how to survive the gloomy economic times that are inevitable after 8 years of Bush the dull (sorry had to take the cheap slam at the idiot not as good as “Blind Side”) and the policies of the current administration which seem to be getting out of control in terms of spending…few if any real groups are trying to figure out how to make human spaceflight relevant to the new changes that HAVE to occur to help American survive and eventually change to meet the challenges of this century.

all these groups (who have no real chance of affecting policy) are all thinking in terms of the old reality…ie that there is essentially unlimited federal dollars. For pete sakes folks. Federal Revenues are running at 15 percent GDP and expenditures are at 25.

Oh well…and the band played on

Robert G. Oler

Robert G. Oler

“No word, though, on the state of the controversy between ProSpace and the Space Frontier Foundation, which announced plans last week for its own March Storm event”

Pity ProSpace didn’t trademark the term March Storm. If they did they could be suing the SFF for infringement on it. But it says a lot about the SFF that they would just hijack the term for their own purposes.