You haven't looked at the new Delta or Atlas lately, have you? They sport pretty impresive numbers.
The Air Force smartly went off and built up reliable unmanned systems following Challenger. Nasa should have been thinking similarly with the manned side, and one could argue they were, but they either were not funded sufficiently or choose not to prioritize funding for a shuttle replacement.
It is a commentary that in our society, if you ask people if manned space is important, 80% will say yes. But if you ask them to prioritize spending, of twelve priorities, NASA will rank near dead last, second only to foriegn aid. That might explain the space budget.
Which numbers are those? The only numbers that really matter are cost. That has been the legacy of launchers: The have been steadily improving in the eyes of the engineers, but in the eyes of the customer, they are the same as they ever were.
I never knew myopia could be terminal until I talked to a launcher designer.