Just a hunch but the scientists who don't approve are the ones who aren't getting grants? I am all for private funding of basic science research, and if there are billionaires putting cash bounties on problems they would like to be solved then tough cookies for the scientists who want to work on other things. The idea of governments funding science is new; wealthy patrons funding all manner of science inquiry (and doing the research themselves as well) was the norm for centuries. Personally I would rather see someone who has made something of themselves in business decide who gets scientific grants rather than a bureaucrat and history has many examples of a scientist obtaining patronage to perform research in areas that weren't originally of interest to the donor. Perhaps scientific advocacy and PR is an under-staffed field in science?