The problem with gov't-funded science

One of the complaints against leaving science to "the market" is the unreliability of funding, depending on the health of the market or the whims of those who control the purse strings. Another is that privately-funded science funds might be squandered on pet projects, or science that only benefits a select few (i.e. the company that develops it & brings it to market).

Those arguments are, however, mostly meaningless when it becomes apparent that the alternative, gov't-funded science, is at least as bad in those respects. At least privately-funded research can lead to new services or products that are of use to society. One could argue that basic (as opposed to applied) research is also of benefit to society, and perhaps there is a case to be made for gov't funding of basic research.

But with gov't-funded science, as with gov't-funded anything, the purse strings are controlled by Congress, a greedy, demagogic, self-interested, irrational body that acts like a 5-year-old in a candy store with unlimited money. As such, it should come as a surprise to absolutely no one that the funding priorities of Congress might not match up with those of actual scientists & engineers.

Or so you'd think, but apparently it did come as something of a surprise for NASA's top management, who with much wailing and gnashing of teeth are now complaining bitterly to Congress that they must now cut funds on their pet projects to fund Congress'.

While I support much of the genuine science & engineering that NASA does, they need to do a better job of budgeting to account for the inevitable changes in the political wind. They also should do a better job of prioritizing their commitments, keeping in mind that there will always be additional demands being made by their kid-in-a-candy-store overlords.