tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13736696.post-26891919125506194262008-03-10T19:08:00.000-07:002008-03-10T19:08:00.000-07:00I posted this over at TransTerrestrial but it seems more appropriate, (and much more likley to get a response :o) here so forgive the 'spam' but:<BR/><BR/>"Sustainability" and the idea of LEO/L-X infrastructure as well as "expanded" manned presence in space seems to be the theme of most of the discussion on how the VSE/ESAS should be run by NASA, but I'm a bit confussed as to how this 'applies' the argument since it wasn't what Congress has been telling NASA to do and much as I loved the concept of the VSE Congress has never been really 'open' to advancing manned space flight and even less so allowing NASA to do it.<BR/><BR/>I've often heard that NASA has "failed" the VSE and "defied" the Presidents mandates etc. My difficulty with this though is while the President can (and did) present suggestions for goals and programs for NASA he has no power what-so-ever to actually assign NASA tasks, approve or disapprove financial or materials resources or programs all that being Congress' duty being overall in charge of line-by-line authorization and mission direction of NASA.<BR/><BR/>Since it is Congress that has specifically forbidden any development of technology or programs that can "directly" relate to sending people to Mars it would stand to reason that they would also oppose NASA participation in any activity that would expand manned space flight into LEO or beyond wouldn't it?<BR/><BR/>If someone can give me a more indepth explination or set me straight I'd appreciate it, but right at this moment I have to agree with:<BR/>"If 'pro' is the opposite of 'con' then is Congress the opposite of Progress?"<BR/><BR/>RandyRandy Campbellnoreply@blogger.com