For a long time, discussions around permitting reform have been stuck in the insular world of Washington. It’s all been about the same old arguments over power lines and pipelines, while the real issues often get overlooked. The stakes are higher than just connecting energy projects. The push for reform is crucial to strengthen the U.S. defense industrial base swiftly and cost-effectively, especially to deter potential large-scale conflicts with China.
The responsibility lies heavily on the U.S. to outpace its rivals in producing weapons, ships, and military supplies. Unfortunately, over the last 20 years, various factors like national security issues and cumbersome environmental reviews have weakened domestic manufacturing and given China significant control over defense-related industries and global supply chains.
The consequences are stark. China has taken the lead in many manufacturing sectors fundamental to defense. For example, its steel production is about twelve times that of the U.S. In shipbuilding, China’s output dwarfs that of the U.S. by a staggering margin—one major Chinese shipyard can produce more than the entire U.S. commercial shipbuilding industry combined. For too long, American policymakers from both parties have ignored this alarming trend.
Recent global conflicts have made these discrepancies particularly clear. In Ukraine, U.S. and allied military production is struggling to meet actual demands. The U.S. ramped up 155mm gun production significantly, but that still didn’t meet Ukraine’s needs, which are estimated to be between 150,000 and 200,000 rounds per month. This situation has exposed vulnerabilities in our supply chains. Similar challenges arise in fulfilling our own military needs, especially when assisting allies like Israel. The reality is that idled production lines and a reliance on foreign resources leave the U.S. ill-prepared for intense conflict.
History teaches us about the perils of underestimating industrial might. Nazi Germany developed advanced technologies in World War II, which initially surprised Allied forces. Yet, America’s manufacturing capacity ultimately made the difference, turning out hundreds of thousands of aircraft and ships, far surpassing the Axis powers’ output.
During the Civil War, the North had the manufacturing edge, producing dramatically more than the South. Even North Korea’s introduction of mechanization serves as a cautionary tale; it dramatically increased efficiency. Today, artificial intelligence presents a similar opportunity. A country that excels in AI could dominate in conflicts, much like the industrial North over the agrarian South. Both AI and mechanization need dependable power to maximize their economic capabilities.
China now possesses many advantages that the U.S. once held. Its defense infrastructure is more adaptable to wartime production and can quickly scale up without facing significant bureaucratic hurdles.
Rebuilding America’s defense industry will take more than tweaking existing processes or staffing up licensing teams. A fundamental shift is required in how government regulations are perceived, addressing the obstacles that hinder the growth of our defense manufacturing base. Essential infrastructure, encompassing roads, ports, and power generation, is critical for operations. Without reliable power, facilities for critical resources like munitions and advanced technology can’t thrive amid regulatory delays.
If we fail to create this vital industrial ecosystem, we expose ourselves to strategic weaknesses that no technological advancement can counterbalance. The ingenuity of the American workforce is a tremendous asset, but it can’t replace the raw materials or sophisticated weaponry when supply chains are disrupted. Therefore, Congress must prioritize modernizing permitting processes as a national security imperative.
Time is of the essence. China’s pace is alarming; they are developing capabilities far faster than the U.S. Every year, defense projects in the U.S. suffer from permit delays that inflate costs significantly. Delaying projects often results in doubled or tripled expenses. Streamlining these processes could not only enhance defense production but also result in substantial cost savings.
To make meaningful changes, bipartisan cooperation is essential to authorize the management and construction of defense supply chains while limiting further bureaucratic red tape.
I’ve worked with honest Democrats willing to find common ground, all of whom recognize the importance of environmental protections while understanding the need for a robust defense industry. They remain committed to legal standards for monitoring and compliance. There’s precedent for this kind of approach in various non-security laws, demonstrating it’s possible to achieve both defense objectives and environmental safeguards.
It’s clear we need to take decisive action. The U.S. must leverage its industrial strength to discourage conflict and ensure success if deterrence fails. Reform is an essential first step in that direction. The era of half-measures and insider discussions must end.
