[William McKinley]

I think it is wrong to say they work with the lowest bidder.

They work with the lowest bidder that meets the requirements.

The problem, when problems turn up regarding quality, is not with the bidding process. It is with either the system to assure the requirements are met, or with the development of the requirements to begin with.

If there is a good set of requirements, and a good process to ensure compliance with the requirements, then the lowest bid system is optimal.

[liberalnot]

obviously.

let's write into the new contracts that a 3rd shuttle loss is a no-no.

so, that contractors know.

[norton]

The problem is that this was a 'good set of requirements' forty years ago.
The problem is that NASA itself is a bureaucracy and full of all the nerdy types that bureaucracies attract - as well as the techs and astronauts who make up the public image.
The problem is that there has been no funding for a follow-on of any type since the current fleet showed that it would work and could be over-worked.
The problem is that the public is tickled with watching shuttle launches and landings and not the least concerned about exploration beyond the low-space levels the shuttle operates in.

Besides, the Russians can't afford any sort of 'space race' now that they've taken their header. So the majority is quite content until they get some little surprise, and the debate turns to blame instead of goals.

[lonestar]

The reference to the "lowest bidder" is to an old astronaut joke.