I love the idea of human beings returning to the moon
and staying for more than three days, driving more than 20 miles,
and living and working in a pressurized "permanent" habitation-module
that would be much roomier than the Apollo LEM [The Apollo LEM
had 'living space' equivalent to that of only 4 telephone booths].

The cost?
It actually might work out by phasing out the space-shuttles and
SELLING OFF the 'completed' [2009?] ISS to the highest bidder [Europe? Walt Anderson? Mr. Bigelow?].

What's more, the problem with the R&D and production of the ISS modules and hardware
was/is is that they all had to be compatable and fit together perfectly in LEO.
No such problem for a moonbase!
On the moon's surface, the moonbase modules do not have to be compatable and linked-up,
thus less-wasted time and fewer cost over-runs in designing, building and testing those moonbase modules.

I'm not saying there WON'T be cost over-runs. Aerospace companies almost consider it a tradition
to expect cost over-runs when dealing with NASA.

BUT!! If President Bush were to plan the moonbase using my suggestions he should 'plan for'
a moonbase with [perhaps] EIGHT modules with year-round occupancy for 4 astronauts/cosmonauts, but
REALISTICALLY expect that to be REDUCED by the inevitable "cost over-runs" to FOUR modules occupied by 2-3 astronauts/cosmonauts
for 3 months out of every year.
I think that proposal would keep costs in check, development time short, and MAYBE even keep the moonbase
budget smaller than the ISS development budget.
What do you think?

Jacob

"This world has enough for everyone's need, not everyone's greed."
MAHATMA GANDHI.