So far, most all of the noise about the administration's space plan has come from politicians from states and districts directly impacted by the Constellation cancellation and the end of the Shuttle program. There has yet to be much input from three other major players: the 95% of Congress that is currently unaware of or unconcerned about the NASA budget turmoil, the general public, and arithmetic.

As I've pointed out several times here, the non-NASA sector of Congress has consistently refused to increase the funding for NASA even during good economic times. It's hard to believe they will boost it now with deficits/debt going through the roof. Yes, the NASA budget is a small percentage of the total budget but if they can't say no to a NASA increase, they can't say no to anyone. (The "discretionary" budget is turning into a collection of mini-entitlements for particular groups.) It's quite possible that Congress will not accept Obama's small boost to the NASA budget and may even cut the agency's funding.

The general public has shown no enthusiasm for greater funding for NASA. See, for example, this recent poll. Its unlikely that any politician outside of a small number of districts and states with big NASA centers and contractors would suffer in any way by voting for the Obama plan or for an even tougher policy for the agency.

As noted in the previous item, the budget arithmetic makes Constellation completely untenable. Continuing the Shuttle is extremely expensive and dangerous. A government launcher, i.e. Ares I/Orion, would be stupendously expensive to develop and operate.

For the Space Summit on April 15th, President Obama may be tempted to offer several expensive modifications to the current plan, e.g. extra Shuttle flights and a heavy lifter project, in hopes of mollifying opposition, especially in Florida. However, this runs the risk that the rest of the country will see him yielding to pressure from a special interest group and committing the country to even more unsustainable spending.

I would suggest he try another approach. First give a clear account of the reasoning behind the new budget and the arithmetic that drove it. Then explain that the only way to save NASA's human spaceflight program is to make spaceflight much less expensive. And the only way to make it less expensive is to encourage commercial companies to compete with innovative approaches. Lower cost spaceflight will not only enable NASA to do great things but also lead to lots of new jobs, new technologies, and new opportunities in space. This approach may not satisfy the local audience but I think it would play well with the broader public and with Congress.
====
More space policy items:
/-- A little bit more about the White House space conference - Space Politics - Mar.10.10
/-- STS-131 Shuttle Report | Shuttle leader says extending program still feasible - Spaceflight Now- Mar.10.10
/-- Rep. Frank Wolf and Five Others Will Call on Bolden for 30 Day Study - spacepolicyonline.com- Mar.10.10