The F-35 Program: A Matter of Priorities

The troubled F-35 program highlights a clash between priorities. On one hand, there’s a focus on developing advanced weaponry that can be deployed efficiently. On the other, there’s an emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, including concerns over bias and representation. It raises the question: if you’re in a position of responsibility at the Pentagon or as a defense contractor, should you prioritize defense or these other social issues?

A critical report released by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in September 2025 pointed to significant issues within the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program during the Biden administration. The report cited ongoing delays in aircraft and engine deliveries from Lockheed Martin, the primary contractor, and similar issues with engine supplier Pratt & Whitney. The Pentagon’s modernization efforts for the F-35 have exceeded budgets by over $6 billion and are roughly five years behind schedule.

Under President Biden and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, there’s been a notable focus on DEI within the military. Initiatives have included mandates on racial quotas, funding for gender transitions, and the adoption of preferred pronouns. Many argue that these priorities have adversely affected the military’s readiness, effectiveness, and morale.

This situation, however, may have worked out well for Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney, the two firms primarily associated with the F-35 program.

Last June, a whistleblower from Lockheed spoke out about the company’s DEI policies, revealing that bonuses had been awarded based on race rather than performance. Lockheed also received a perfect score from the Human Rights Campaign for its DEI efforts. But, one has to wonder—what about the actual fighter jets that taxpayers have funded?

Pratt & Whitney has similarly embraced DEI initiatives. Their leadership made a point of celebrating Pride Month and publicly committed to an inclusive workplace, especially following significant social movements. Yet, such initiatives typically take a back seat to the pressing need for timely delivery of defense products.

Unfortunately, taxpayers have found themselves in a difficult position. Both Lockheed and Pratt & Whitney have received substantial financial incentives to meet delivery timelines, even as their performance fell short repeatedly.

The GAO report indicated that, for instance, in 2024, Lockheed managed to deliver only 110 aircraft, with those deliveries delayed by an average of 238 days, a notable increase from 61 days the previous year. Pratt & Whitney’s records showed a consistent pattern of late engine deliveries over multiple years, raising uncomfortable questions about accountability.

Rather than pursuing better outcomes or revisiting contracts, the current administration seems to have rewarded these contractors. Is this a reflection of a deeper commitment to DEI at the expense of traditional military priorities? That’s up for each individual to consider.