So lets think about what the Commission should and would say if we were in there shoes.

Build CEV in under 2 years fully man rated to be used with the shuttle c derivative launch vehicle for short term use of at least 15 to 20 years.

Design lunar lander and simple base combo with equipment to process the rich lunar surface materials into what ever is needed to be set up before simulated mars crew would arrive.

Design simulated mars crew vehicle redundant from orbit vehicle to simulate long space travel jouney for on it's way to mars from earth orbit while traveling to the moon. With combinations or regular engines and ion engine to give the slow rate of travel and escape from colision ability if need be. Large crew habitation module and storage for all needed supplies in order to make this work.

Do not waste a lot of time with umanned missions since all that is needed is to find a suitable location to land at.

Try to picture the crew as self suficient using what ever is available and what ever has been brought along.

Resupply esentiatials as needed by follow up missions but treat the test as if this were a biosphere like exercise once closed with crew it then no outside infucences are allowed.

Most of all use resources even if they are not derived from NASA projects or affilations. Do all of this without developing new technolgies or products to get the job started and done.
Use what we have.

Tyson is right on. This will not survive if it becomes a partisan issue. Im thankful to finnaly see an honest outlook on how this will work. Space Exploration is an american issue, if a not a human issue, not a republican one. Im glad the council has the great leadership, understanding and foresight to see this through. Im crossing my fingers and hoping that it will pay off.

Here's the email I just sent to the commission on the question of sustainability. Perhaps it will be of interest to the group.

I concur with what you have to say with sustainability in that it is a must. I am only slightly older in that I do remember the moon landing of the Apollo astronauts. Had been interested in space since the 4th grade, which would have been in 67 with respect to astronomy. But followed my other passion of music and Electronics instead as that era was ending. As a teen I built and launched many Estes' model rockets both solid propellant and compressed aerosol gas with parachute recovery losing a few along the way.

NASA must ask the commercial industry for standardized sets of parts. For NASA to use rather than custom building everything if the industry is to flourish beyond the Lockheed and Boeing space contractors. Getting more equipment to aid in the manufacturing process of rocket building is also a must to lowering the cost per launch.
The simple rides to suborbital is a start but lets push the prize to the next level to an orbit say of 125 mile to the say 200 mile range then this would have more meaningful.
But most of all NASA must get flying again no matter what the end cost is so long as there is a check and balance system put in place to keep NASA focused on the goals of the SEI vision as well as to hold cost down.

Oh, keep sending in those comments and keep posting to this and other web logs for discussion and just maybe our collective voices will be heard.