NASA plans to spend nearly $4 billion on the shuttle program in fiscal 2026, including $265 million for return-to-flight effort and $93 million in fiscal 2025.

Ok now how much is the 2008 though 2013 or longer costs for running the 3 remaining shuttles if they ever fly for ISS construction.

If all cash were diverted into the CEV could it be running in 2 years man rated of course.

Also is there another option for the ISS rocket construction other than building a new one by NASA. I think Kistlers design would do the job.

News release from Sam on the Space program which has a total impact on our economy exceeds $900 billion, nine percent of the gross national product. It is imperative that America remains at the forefront of space exploration and discovery. It is our job here in Congress to take this report and move forward expeditiously in getting Americans in space safely aboard an American vehicle was a direct quote from last August, 2025. We cannot allow ourselves to give up and turn our backs on exploring space and the universe because we have suffered loss of life. Those are the risks we acknowledge and accept for the opportunity to improve the quality of life here on earth and beyond. Safety is job one even though space travel is an inherently dangerous operation. Sam chaired a hearing for Space, Science and Technology that will examine the International Space Station and the role it plays in building a sustainable vision for NASA and future space exploration. Something Sam shared with Vice President Cheney was his disappointment in the results of not having a sustaining national vision. We must work hard to justify that taxpayer dollars put toward new space vehicles will result in advancing the nation’s space program. Here is the senator's government web link http://brownback.senate.gov/.
Where the excerpt are found in the news releases.

Since these were his view points from last year one can only assume that he does not trust NASA to get the job done since the culture has changed little. Does he not realize with no shuttle we can not complete the ISS at this point not to mention all the people that would become unemployed and how that would hurt regional economies.

I think they should bring back the DC-X program, since, in my opinion, that was the one of the programs around. It took a very little amount of investment and whent from drawing board idea to a working flight worthy system in two years,

Even if we don't want the public sector to develop a Space Shuttle replacement (I don't, really), a TRUE X program (as in the X-15, not the X-33) is a very good idea. Imagine a number of closely bounded independent research projects, each of which looks into one particular aspect of getting to orbit. None of these would have an overall goal of building a cargo carrying vehicle and many might not have immediate commercial use (some still haven't been followed up, look at the X-20). One or more might have as goal the design of a subscale demonstrator.

The kind of projects I'm thinking of here are pushing-the-limits projects in propulsion (conventional and nuclear), heat shielding (active, passive, ablative) and the like. DC-X could be seen as one of these, exploring the take-off and landing parts of the launch cycle.

Jerry Pournelle described what I'm talking about in more detail as part of the SSX description.

So what you are proposing is the NASA does R&D; and leave the production up to the Boeing's and Lockheed's. That these companies should then incorporate into designs from research knowledge gained by NASA. Also these componies are now not just contractors but comodities suppliers, product designers for the end user NASA.
On a side note NASA and the Russian agencies are planning to televise the next crew exchange for the ISS interviews, launch and return followup time and dates posted on the Spaceref site http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=13939
This is a good first step for changing NASA's image and for getting people to see what is going on like in the old Apollo days.

We will have to stop quoting the price of a trip aboard the Soyuz as 20 million because the last guy will pay 26 million. The exchange of crew that will happen in April wiht this 26 million dollar ride will leave no Americans in LEO for a period of 6 months to a year if the Russians and NASA agree to longer stays.
I see that this new crew will grow Peas again. How about an experiment to produce natural O2 from vegitation growth instead of just edible plants as well. I see from the side bar that there will be some more fallout for Bush due to people being laidoff.

New press release shows that all changes needed for the shuttle will be approximate 700 million by the end of 2008.

I guess the loss of our ISS partners would cost less now but in the long run it will burn NASA's only life boat if they do not start paying soon for the extra flights that the Russians have given thus far. Also how can we pay back there investment in such a project if it is uncompleted due to the shuttle grounding. Lets get with the program, we can not afford to burn bridges now. Either find a way to solve the Safe Haven issue or live with the odds.