I'm all for that. But I wonder if the corporate culture at NASA hasn't swung too far the other way. If you recall, one of the problems identified by the Challenger Commission was that the culture at NASA had become one where they were too willing to take risks. And thus we had situations where dangerous rockets were being launched and the possibility existed that someone (or many people) were going to die. And some did. Which is bad. But also, sometimes necessary.What would it take to focus on the SLS program and not back on forth on unrelated programs, politicians, etc?
I think NASA is now unwilling to take any kind of risk. And that's also bad. Because space is dangerous. And there's literally nothing that can be done to make it 100% safe. You can make it 80% safe at best.
It's kind of like computer uptime. You can make computers and operating systems with 80% to 90% uptime. Easily. You can even make them with 97% uptime, but that takes considerably more money. And that last 3%? Well, now you're into millions, and even then, the best you're going to get is 99.5% uptime.