I expected more slashdot.
This is as bad as Apple claiming to have invented rounded corners (sorry couldn't resist that cheap shot)

Seriously a hobbyist/ university is much more likely to experiment with the EXISTING superior alternatives.

Many electric options exist for kit cars.
Many dozens more exist for retrofitting existing cars with electric motors (the most popular being the VW Beetle from what I have seen)

And the upside of working with these solutions is that they are FAR more likely to be passed as road registerable (because they use an existing tested base vehicle) than something that has not been run through any of the international safety tests.

I am sure that, while government may sometimes be inefficient, there would be management types asking these sort of questions already.
Look at the bigger picture...

Costs of failure:
Loss of equipment
Payout to astronaut's family
Retraining fees
Loss of (quality) applicants
Loss of trust/ reputation
Loss of political support due to negative coverage
Loss of funding due to loss of political support

Also they are not as fortunate as other establishments who can deflect blame/ hatred on some opposing group (eg military - terrorists, law enforcement - criminals, etc)

Disclaimer: IANAD (and I am not part of the US system either but things are still similar over this side of the globe)

Im sorry but you assume a "promising" drug will be beneficial to people in this situation.

Many "promising" drugs have killed people quicker than the condition they claim to be treating. Not to mention the drugs that have repercussions for generations to come (thalidomide comes to mind on that front - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide).

If the person is willing to try these, they go into trials. The FDA doesn't stop them doing that (limited places on the trials is unfortunate)
Sometimes it has been shown that merely being in the trial can have associated placebic effects.

Also, if studies show strong enough evidence that the drug is effective and safe, then the FDA is ethically obligated to get the control group (and wider affected public) onto the cure ASAP

The alternative is one where everyone gets to go onto whatever they want. Hence no company bothers with trials and people are left with no idea of how to sort the legitimate from the snake oil.

Umm... NOONE knows what Tony Abbott supports (including himself), except saying no to the government.

Clarke and Dawe captured this brilliantly (IMHO):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3wKCzIw5Gs&feature=plcp

PS If any politician is reading this, I am willing to vote for any party that opposes this.
I wish Gamers 4 Croyden (i think that was the party name) were in my area.

Someone in the UN must feel they are becoming out of touch, only getting involved in the physical world. First "Internet Rights", now IP law reform... what next? UN mandated hackerspaces?

It seems they are going further than that...
(From the google car course announcement page)
"Dear students,
We have listened to your feedback about how awesome, engaging, exciting and educational, but also time consuming, our classes are. We are aware that most of you have many commitments in your life - job, family, studies at offline brick-and-mortar universities, house, garden, pets, vacations, travel plans, and many other things that are incompatible with our deadline based course model. Therefore we have decided to see if making our courses self-paced will enable more people to enjoy our content and learn new and exciting things.
The courses that are offered for the second time will have no deadlines, and you will be able to work through them at your own pace. You can start at any time, and take as much time as needed to finish the course."

So it seems all courses not on their debut will be self paced.

(P.S. Hooray for me... after 10+ years of stalking slashdot and posting as AC if I was going to post, I finally got off my butt and registered)