I do not understand the rationale, a government program fails disastrously creating literally the opposite effect desired. And the suggestion is to have _more_ of said program?
You must understand that government is the opposite of a typical business. For example, NASA's space shuttle unexpectedly blows up, so congress immediately gives them a bunch more money under the rationale that they failed because they are "underfunded". If a business faced the same failure, they would lose business, their stock prices would fall down and they would have to work hard to persuade their customers that they had a mistake but they are fixing the problem.
Just do a cursory search for the word "underfunded" in an article describing some government agency's failures and you will see this argument is quite common. There are countless examples.
Just do a cursory search for the word "underfunded" in an article describing some government agency's failures and you will see this argument is quite common. There are countless examples.