Re: "perennially underfunded"
What would you call the Mars rovers' (or any probe's, for that matter) extended life cycles? Or salvaging Skylab from Apollo leftovers? Even before the budget body blow of the mid-70s, the plan was not to build new craft to go to Venus, but to reuse Apollo parts. They do a lot of good work on a lot less than most US agencies. Let's not forget that most people still see space exploration as a waste. Part of NASA's inefficiency stems from its being underfunded in the first place. If budget cuts force them to scrap the hugely expensive design work on Constellation, how is starting over going to help make things more efficient? Another huge blow to NASA is our changing military needs. Without the arms race, there could have been no space race, not least of all because of rocket tech's dependance on ICBM tech, but also because military contractors built the craft and because of nationalist feelings. If my nationalist drives are satiated by driving a big car with a flag hanging out the window, who cares about Mars? NASA engineers are quite creative about what to do with their limited resources, and if they had even enough money to follow through on those ideas, I think you would find it could do quite well for itself.