It's an interesting example where just because something is done by the "public" doesn't make it safer than done privately. Everyone knows about regulatory cap

It's an interesting example where just because something is done by the "public" doesn't make it safer than done privately. Everyone knows about regulatory capture (when companies manage their safety regulators). Normally it's private organizations pushing public safety regulators. Here, on the other hand, it was a public organization that took risks. The reason is simple. Every organization has certain needs. Boeing needs to make planes (make $), Ford needs to make cars (make $), etc. Safety is an annoying thing they need to get over with ASAP to get to their primary purpose (make $). Nasa needed to launch, and (at least for the managers) it became an acceptable risk. If it flies 20 times and blows once, they win. So should there be a NASA and a NASAOC (NASA oversight committee, to check on them)? Then the organization on top of both (Congress, the President) will choose which one to listen. This is the general problem of self-policing. And the only way to get around this is by having multiple, independent, providers. So if NASA doesn't think SpaceX is safe enough, they can shut down the contract while still having access to space. If Nasa had that in 1986, the Shuttle would have been (rightfully) decommissioned then and there. Unfortunately, it required _another_ accident before anything moved. And the lesson can be learned to matters outside space.