The $58 Billion They Don't Want You to Know About: How MAGA Republicans Voted Against Your Paycheck

Ukraine aid isn't foreign charity—it's the biggest domestic manufacturing investment in a generation. And your representative probably voted to kill it.

By Chris Sampson
Editor-in-Chief, NatSecMedia
Kyiv, Ukraine

DEAR READER: Please consider a basic support membership at $5 per month, a like and a repost helps too. As a journalist in Ukraine, I work every day to examine our world situation from where the fulcrum of the world’s hell pivots, and your help is vital. Independent Journalism is not cheap to do, and I will keep making the posts available for all readers (even during nearly 24 hr daily blackouts), but good patrons are needed and I thank you for your time. - Chris Sampson, Kyiv, January 22, 2026

Let me tell you about the biggest con job in American politics right now.

Your congressman—let’s say he’s from Alabama, or South Carolina, or Ohio—stood up in the House chamber and voted against Ukraine aid. He called it “blank checks to foreigners” and “America Last” and whatever other slogans tested well with the MAGA base. He said we need to take care of Americans first.

Here’s what he didn’t tell you: He just voted against $58 billion flowing into American factories, American jobs, and American towns. He voted against money coming to his own district. He voted against your paycheck.

I’m not being hyperbolic. I have the Pentagon’s own data right here, and it tells a story that should enrage every working American who’s been sold the lie that Ukraine aid is somehow charity we can’t afford.

Ukraine security assistance is domestic industrial policy. It’s the government paying American companies to build weapons in American facilities with American workers. Every single dollar Congress appropriates for Ukraine gets spent in places like Scranton, Pennsylvania and Lima, Ohio and Anniston, Alabama.

And the Republicans who scream the loudest about “America First”? They’re the same ones voting to shut down the assembly lines in their own backyards.

Let me show you exactly how deep this betrayal goes.

The Numbers They Hope You Never See

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the Pentagon has obligated $50.9 billion in contracts to U.S. defense manufacturers. That’s not money going to Ukraine—that’s money going to American companies to either build new equipment or replace what we’ve sent from our stockpiles.

On top of that, there’s another $7 billion in direct industrial investments—building new production lines, expanding factories, upgrading equipment.

Total: $57.9 billion. Across 37 states. In less than three years.

To put that in perspective: That’s more than the entire GDP of 15 individual U.S. states. It’s three times what the federal government spent on Amtrak over the same period. It’s the kind of manufacturing investment economic development officials would kill for.

And it’s creating jobs in every region of the country—blue states, red states, swing states, rural communities that haven’t seen this kind of manufacturing boom in decades.

Alabama’s $4 Billion Secret

Let’s start with the state that received the most money: Alabama.

Four billion, two million dollars. That’s billion with a B. The largest single recipient of Ukraine-related defense contracts in the entire country.

You know what Alabama’s House delegation did? Six out of seven Republicans voted NO on the most recent Ukraine aid package (H.R. 8035).

Think about that. Alabama is getting $4 billion in defense manufacturing investment—the Anniston Army Depot alone is a massive beneficiary—and the state’s own representatives voted to shut it down.

Why? Because Kevin McCarthy and later Mike Johnson told them that opposing Ukraine aid was a loyalty test. That being “America First” meant leaving billions of dollars on the table.

The one Alabama representative who voted YES—probably got primaried or threatened with it. Because in today’s GOP, you’re not allowed to bring home $4 billion in manufacturing investment if it means admitting that helping Ukraine defend itself also helps American workers.

South Carolina’s Invisible $3.8 Billion

Here’s an even stranger story: South Carolina received $3.777 billion. The second-largest recipient in the country.

Guess how much media coverage that fact has received in South Carolina? Basically zero. I’ve searched for local news stories about this windfall. They don’t exist.

You know what does exist? Five out of seven South Carolina House members voting AGAINST the funding. Lindsey Graham in the Senate voted for it—to his credit—but his colleague Tim Scott voted NO.

Why isn’t this a massive local news story? “South Carolina Lands $3.8 Billion Defense Manufacturing Boom” should be on the front page of every paper in the state. Economic development officials should be doing victory laps.

Instead: silence. Because acknowledging that Ukraine aid benefits South Carolina would require Republican officials to admit they’ve been lying about what this money actually does.

Pennsylvania: Where the Shells Are Made

Let’s go to Pennsylvania, which received $2.989 billion—$2.54 billion in contracts plus $449 million in direct facility investments.

The crown jewel is the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant, operated by General Dynamics. It’s the largest 155mm artillery shell production facility in the United States. Ukraine has fired more than three million 155mm rounds defending itself from Russian invasion. Every single one of those shells that came from U.S. stockpiles is being replaced by American workers in Scranton.

The plant has hired hundreds of new workers. It’s running multiple shifts. It’s the kind of blue-collar manufacturing work that politicians give speeches about wanting to bring back to America.

Pennsylvania’s House delegation? Mixed voting record, with several Republicans voting NO despite this massive investment in their state.

The politics here are absolutely insane. You have members of Congress representing districts that are economically benefiting from Ukraine aid, and they’re voting to kill it because they’re more afraid of a mean tweet from Donald Trump than they are of explaining to laid-off workers why the plant shut down.

Ohio’s Lima Tank Plant: A Case Study in Hypocrisy

Ohio received $1.984 billion. The centerpiece is the Lima Tank Plant—the only facility in America that produces M1 Abrams tanks.

This plant was on life support a decade ago. Production had slowed to a crawl. The Army didn’t need new tanks. Workers were being laid off.

Then Ukraine happened. Suddenly the plant is running full production again, building tanks to replace the ones we’re sending to Ukraine. Hundreds of jobs. Supply chain work for component manufacturers across the region. Economic activity spreading through the community.

The Lima Tank Plant is in Ohio’s 4th Congressional District. You know who represents that district?

Jim Jordan.

You know how Jim Jordan voted on Ukraine aid?

NO.

Let me repeat that because it’s so perfectly absurd: Jim Jordan represents the district that contains America’s only tank factory, which is thriving because of Ukraine aid, and he voted against the funding that keeps his own constituents employed.

Why? Because Jim Jordan has presidential ambitions, and you can’t become the MAGA nominee by admitting that Joe Biden’s foreign policy created jobs in your district.

It’s cynicism so pure it’s almost beautiful.

Texas: Twelve Republicans Voted Against $2.2 Billion

Texas received $2.168 billion in combined contracts and investments. That includes major HIMARS production, artillery ammunition facilities in Mesquite and Grand Prairie operated by General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin, and various other defense manufacturing operations.

Twelve Texas Republicans voted NO on Ukraine aid.

Twelve.

These aren’t representatives from districts with no defense manufacturing. These are members who have Lockheed Martin facilities, General Dynamics operations, and Raytheon contractors in or near their districts. They’re voting against the economic interests of their own constituents because MAGA ideology demands it.

Lance Gooden. Beth Van Duyne. Ten others. All of them put partisan signaling ahead of the jobs and investment flowing into Texas.

The Kentucky Paradox: McConnell’s $1.7 Billion vs. His Delegation

Kentucky received $1.733 billion—including an impressive $774 million in direct industrial base investments, which is more direct facility investment than almost any other state.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell fought for Ukraine aid and voted YES. He understands what this money means for Kentucky’s economy.

But McConnell’s House colleagues? James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, voted NO. Thomas Massie, the libertarian who fashions himself a principled fiscal conservative, voted NO.

They’re willing to reject $1.7 billion for their state because supporting Ukraine has become politically toxic in GOP primaries.

Think about the insanity: McConnell secures well over a billion dollars in manufacturing investment for Kentucky, and his own party’s House members try to kill it.

The Pattern Is Clear: Ideology Over Economics

Let me zoom out and show you the full picture:

• 37 states received Ukraine-related defense manufacturing investments

• The top 10 states alone account for over $23 billion

• Investment is distributed across red states, blue states, and swing states

• It’s creating jobs in rural communities, mid-sized cities, and major metropolitan areas

• It’s rebuilding American ammunition production, artillery manufacturing, missile systems, armored vehicle production, and air defense capabilities

And despite all of this—despite the fact that this is exactly the kind of domestic manufacturing investment that politicians claim to want—Republican after Republican voted NO.

Not because the economics are bad. The economics are excellent.

Not because it’s wasteful. Every dollar is going to American companies employing American workers.

They voted NO because MAGA ideology requires it. Because Tucker Carlson and the online right have decided that supporting Ukraine is globalist weakness. Because opposing “forever wars” polls well even when the war in question is a clear-cut case of defending a democracy against naked aggression.

And because Donald Trump—who cares about nothing except his own ego and grudges—has decided that anything Joe Biden supports must be opposed, even if it means killing American jobs.

What You’re Really Paying For

Here’s what that $57.9 billion is actually buying:

Artillery Ammunition: $7.972 billion
This is the foundation of modern warfare. 155mm shells, 105mm rounds, DPICM munitions. Ukraine is firing thousands of rounds per day. Every shell we send from U.S. stockpiles gets replaced by an American manufacturer—primarily at facilities in Pennsylvania, Texas, and Oklahoma.

We went from producing about 14,000 155mm rounds per month to ramping up toward 100,000 per month. That doesn’t happen without massive investment in production capacity. That means new equipment, new workers, expanded facilities.

Air Defense Systems: $5.517 billion
Patriot PAC-3 missiles built by Lockheed Martin. NASAMS systems. Stinger missiles from Raytheon. This is high-tech manufacturing, skilled labor, complex supply chains. These aren’t jobs that can be outsourced to China.

Anti-Armor Weapons: $5.150 billion
Javelin missiles (Lockheed Martin and Raytheon joint venture). TOW missiles. AT-4 systems. Ukraine has destroyed thousands of Russian tanks and armored vehicles with these weapons. Every single one we send gets replaced, which means production lines running at full capacity.

HIMARS and GMLRS Rockets: $3.809 billion
This is Lockheed Martin’s bread and butter, with major production in Grand Prairie, Texas and Camden, Arkansas. HIMARS has been one of the most effective weapons systems in the war—Ukraine uses it to strike ammunition depots, command posts, and logistics hubs deep behind Russian lines.

We’ve sent 40+ HIMARS launchers and thousands of GMLRS rockets. The replacement contracts are keeping production lines humming.

Armored Vehicles: $4.195 billion
Bradley Fighting Vehicles from BAE Systems. Stryker APCs. M1 Abrams tanks from the Lima plant. This is heavy manufacturing—welding, machining, complex assembly. These are good union jobs with benefits.

The Jobs They Don’t Want You to Count

The Pentagon doesn’t publish exact employment figures for these contracts, but the defense manufacturing industry generally creates about 15-20 jobs per $1 million in production contracts when you account for direct employment, supply chain work, and induced economic activity.

Do the math:

• $57.9 billion in total investment

• Conservative estimate: 15 jobs per million

• That’s 868,000+ jobs supported by Ukraine-related defense manufacturing

Even if you cut that estimate in half to be extremely conservative, you’re still talking about 400,000+ American jobs.

These aren’t jobs in Kyiv. They’re jobs in Scranton. In Lima. In Anniston. In Camden. In Grand Prairie. In Tucson. In York, Pennsylvania, where BAE Systems builds Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

They’re welders and machinists and engineers and quality control inspectors and logistics coordinators and supply chain managers.

They’re people who’ve been told for decades that manufacturing jobs are gone forever, that globalization shipped everything to China, that the best they can hope for is a service economy job.

And then Ukraine aid came along and proved that’s a lie. We can build things in America. We can run factories at full capacity. We can create good-paying manufacturing jobs.

We just need the political will to invest in it.

The Real “America First” Story

Here’s the bitter irony: Ukraine aid is the most “America First” defense policy we’ve enacted in decades.

Think about what we’re getting:

1. Degrading Russia’s military capacity without deploying a single American soldier in combat

2. Rebuilding U.S. defense manufacturing that had atrophied after decades of underinvestment

3. Modernizing our own stockpiles with new-production equipment while sending older systems to Ukraine

4. Creating jobs in congressional districts across the country

5. Strengthening NATO and proving that the alliance isn’t just a Cold War relic

6. Demonstrating U.S. weapons effectiveness in actual combat, which helps foreign military sales

7. Expanding production capacity for munitions we’ll need if we ever face a peer conflict with China

All of that for about $50-60 billion per year, which is roughly 7% of the annual defense budget.

Compare that to:

• The Afghanistan War cost about $300 million per day for 20 years

• The Iraq War cost over $2 trillion total

• The F-35 program alone costs about $100 billion in development

Ukraine aid is a bargain. It’s the smartest defense investment we’ve made in a generation.

And MAGA Republicans are trying to kill it.

Not because it doesn’t work. It’s working incredibly well.

Not because it’s too expensive. It’s cheap compared to the alternatives.

They’re trying to kill it because it makes Joe Biden look competent, because it proves that supporting allies works, and because Tucker Carlson told them to.

The Towns They’re Willing to Sacrifice

Let me bring this home to the community level, because that’s where the real damage happens when politicians play these games.

Scranton, Pennsylvania: The ammunition plant is one of the largest employers in the region. It’s brought hundreds of new workers into a city that’s struggled economically for decades. If Ukraine aid stops, what happens to those workers? What happens to the businesses that depend on their paychecks—the restaurants, the stores, the service providers?

Lima, Ohio: The tank plant has been the economic anchor of that community for generations. When production slowed in the 2010s, the whole region felt it. Now it’s booming again. If the funding stops, those workers go back on unemployment. The ripple effects devastate the local economy.

Anniston, Alabama: The Army depot has been there since 1941. It’s survived base closure attempts, budget cuts, and economic downturns. Now it’s thriving because of the refurbishment and ammunition work driven by Ukraine aid. What happens to that community if Republicans succeed in cutting off funding?

Camden, Arkansas: Population 10,000. The General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin facilities are massive local employers. When rocket production ramps up, the whole town benefits. When it stops, the whole town suffers.

These aren’t abstract policy debates. These are real communities with real workers whose livelihoods depend on these defense manufacturing contracts.

And their own representatives are voting to destroy their jobs.

What The Contractors Know (That Politicians Won’t Say)

I’ve looked at the earnings calls and investor presentations from the major defense contractors. You know what they say about Ukraine-related production?

They love it.

Lockheed Martin talks about “strong demand for precision fires” and “multi-year production contracts” for HIMARS and GMLRS.

General Dynamics discusses “robust artillery production” and “increased capacity utilization” at ammunition plants.

RTX (Raytheon) highlights “accelerated delivery schedules” for Stinger missiles and Javelin seekers.

These companies are investing in new equipment, hiring new workers, and expanding facilities because they have multi-year order books. That’s the kind of stability that allows them to make long-term capital investments.

But that stability depends on continued congressional appropriations. If MAGA Republicans succeed in cutting off Ukraine aid, those order books disappear. The expansion stops. The new workers get laid off. The capital investments get mothballed.

The contractors know this. The workers know this. The local economic development officials know this.

The only people pretending not to know are the politicians who’ve decided that MAGA purity tests are more important than their constituents’ jobs.

The Multiplier Effect They Ignore

Here’s what makes this even more economically significant: Defense manufacturing has one of the highest economic multiplier effects of any federal spending.

When the government pays General Dynamics $100 million to produce artillery shells in Scranton, that money doesn’t just stay at General Dynamics. It flows through the entire regional economy:

• General Dynamics pays workers, who spend money at local businesses

• General Dynamics buys components from suppliers across the country

• Those suppliers hire their own workers and buy their own materials

• The local tax base increases as economic activity grows

• Infrastructure improvements get funded

• Schools and hospitals see more resources

Economic studies typically estimate the defense manufacturing multiplier at about 2.0 to 2.5. That means every dollar of defense contracts generates $2-2.50 in total economic activity.

Apply that to $57.9 billion:

Total economic impact: $115-145 billion

That’s not including the long-term benefits of:

• Expanded production capacity that remains after the war

• Worker training and skill development

• Technology improvements and R&D spillovers

• Strengthened supply chains

Ukraine aid isn’t just creating jobs today. It’s rebuilding American industrial capacity for the future.

The Chinese Are Watching

Here’s something the “America First” crowd doesn’t want to talk about: China is watching this very, very closely.

Beijing sees the United States unable to build munitions fast enough. They see our artillery shell production struggling to meet Ukraine’s needs. They see political dysfunction preventing us from sustaining a relatively modest military aid package.

And they’re taking notes.

If we can’t supply Ukraine with 155mm shells, how would we supply Taiwan in a conflict with China? If we can’t maintain political consensus for a $60 billion aid package, how would we sustain a Pacific war effort?

The investment we’re making now—building up ammunition production, expanding missile manufacturing, strengthening our defense industrial base—that’s preparation for potential future conflicts. It’s insurance against Chinese aggression.

Killing Ukraine aid doesn’t make America stronger. It advertises our weakness. It tells Beijing that our political system is too broken to sustain a long-term strategic competition.

That’s the opposite of “America First.” That’s “America Unprepared.”

What Happens If They Win

Let’s game out what happens if MAGA Republicans succeed in cutting off Ukraine aid:

Immediate effects:

• Defense production contracts get canceled or scaled back

• Workers at ammunition plants, missile facilities, and armored vehicle factories get laid off

• Communities that depend on defense manufacturing take an economic hit

• Suppliers throughout the country lose orders

Strategic effects:

• Russia wins in Ukraine, emboldening further aggression

• NATO unity fractures as allies question American reliability

• China sees an opportunity to move on Taiwan

• U.S. defense industrial base shrinks back to pre-war capacity

• We lose the combat-testing data we’ve gained from Ukrainian use of our weapons

Long-term effects:

• American credibility as a security guarantor collapses

• The post-WWII international order unravels

• Authoritarianism advances globally as democracy retreats

• We find ourselves in a more dangerous world with a weaker defense industrial base

All of this to satisfy the ideological requirements of a political movement that has no coherent foreign policy beyond “own the libs.”

The Alternative They’re Not Offering

Here’s what kills me about the Republican opposition: They’re not offering an alternative strategy.

If you don’t want to support Ukraine, fine. Tell me your plan for dealing with Russian aggression. Tell me how you’ll deter China. Tell me how you’ll maintain American credibility with allies.

They don’t have one.

The closest thing to a MAGA foreign policy is Trump’s “I’ll end the war in 24 hours” promise, which translates to forcing Ukraine to surrender territory and accept Russian domination. That’s not a policy—that’s capitulation with a marketing slogan.

The serious foreign policy thinkers—the ones who aren’t auditioning for Fox News contracts—understand that Ukraine aid is strategic leverage. It’s the cheapest way to:

• Weaken a hostile power

• Defend the principle that borders can’t be changed by force

• Demonstrate American resolve

• Rebuild defense manufacturing we’ll need for future challenges

But serious foreign policy thinking is out of fashion in today’s GOP. What’s in fashion is performing for social media, trolling Democrats, and pretending that complex global challenges can be solved with slogans and bluster.

The Money You’re Not Earning

Let me bring this back to the title of this piece: The money they’re keeping you from earning.

If you work in manufacturing, or if you live in a community that depends on manufacturing, or if you believe America should build things instead of just consuming them—this should enrage you.

Your representatives are voting to reject billions of dollars in manufacturing investment. They’re voting against jobs in your community. They’re voting to keep American factories from running at full capacity.

Why? Not because the economics are bad. Not because it’s wasteful. Not because there’s a better alternative.

They’re voting that way because remaining ideologically loyal to MAGA requires opposing anything that might make Biden look good, even if it means killing jobs in their own districts.

That’s not principle. That’s not fiscal conservatism. That’s not even coherent politics.

That’s just nihilism dressed up in “America First” branding.

What You Should Demand

If you live in one of these states—Alabama, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, Kentucky, or any of the other 31 states receiving Ukraine-related investment—you should demand answers from your representatives:

1. Why did you vote against billions in manufacturing investment for our state?

2. What’s your plan for the workers who’ll lose their jobs if this funding stops?

3. How is rejecting defense manufacturing contracts “America First”?

4. What alternative do you propose for deterring Russian aggression and maintaining American credibility?

Don’t let them hide behind slogans. Don’t accept “we need to take care of Americans first” when they just voted against taking care of Americans.

Make them explain exactly why ideology is more important than jobs.

The Bottom Line

Ukraine aid is the biggest domestic manufacturing investment story in a generation, and the media has completely missed it.

$57.9 billion flowing into American factories.
37 states receiving contracts and investments.
Hundreds of thousands of jobs supported.
Critical defense industrial capacity rebuilt.

And MAGA Republicans are trying to kill it.

Not because it doesn’t benefit America—it clearly does.

Not because it’s too expensive—it’s a bargain compared to alternatives.

Not because they have a better strategy—they don’t have a strategy at all.

They’re trying to kill it because Trump says to, and because Fox News tells them to, and because remaining loyal to MAGA talking points is more important than governing responsibly.

This is the choice facing voters: Do you want representatives who’ll bring manufacturing investment home, or do you want representatives who’ll sacrifice your economic interests to perform ideological purity?

Because right now, you’re getting the latter.

And it’s costing you money you could be earning.

---

Chris Sampson is Editor-in-Chief of NatSecMedia, author and long time terrorism researcher. He has reported from Kyiv, Ukraine continuously since January 2022, covering the Russian invasion and Ukrainian resistance.

If you found this investigation valuable, please subscribe and share. Independent journalism documenting the economic realities of foreign policy depends on reader support.

GOVERNMENT AND OFFICIAL SOURCES

1. U.S. Department of Defense, “Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative Funding,” accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/.

2. U.S. Department of Defense, “Contracts for January 2023-December 2024,” Defense.gov Daily Contract Awards, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/.

3. USASpending.gov, “Advanced Search: Ukraine Security Assistance,” U.S. Department of the Treasury, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.usaspending.gov/

4. U.S. Army Contracting Command, “Contract Awards FY2022-FY2024,” accessed January 24, 2026.

5. Congressional Research Service, “U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine,” multiple updates, February 2022-December 2024.

6. Congressional Research Service, “Department of Defense Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief,” by Brendan W. McGarry, various dates 2022-2024.

7. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk, “Roll Call Vote 151: H.R. 8035 - Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024,” April 20, 2024, https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024151.

8. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk, “Final Vote Results for Roll Call 151,” 118th Congress, 2nd Session, April 20, 2024.

9. Library of Congress, “H.R. 8035 - Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024,” Congress.gov, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8035.

10. Library of Congress, “H.R. 5692 - Ukraine Security Assistance and Oversight Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024,” Congress.gov, accessed January 24, 2026.

11. Library of Congress, “H.R. 7691 - Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022,” Congress.gov, accessed January 24, 2026.

12. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Defense Industrial Base: DOD Should Take Steps to Improve Program Oversight and Risk Mitigation,” GAO-24-106237, March 2024.

13. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) Multipliers,” accessed January 2026, https://www.bea.gov/data/special-topics/rims-ii.

14. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Gross Domestic Product by County and Metropolitan Area, 2023,” released December 2024.

15. U.S. Army Materiel Command, “Scranton Army Ammunition Plant Production Expansion,” press release, August 2024.

16. Watervliet Arsenal Public Affairs, “Arsenal Increases Cannon Tube Production to Support Ukraine,” press release, June 2024.

17. Joint Program Executive Office for Armaments and Ammunition, “155mm Projectile Production Status Update,” briefing to Congress, September 2024.

---

CONGRESSIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE SOURCES

18. “GOP for Ukraine Report Card,” GOP for Ukraine coalition, accessed January 24, 2026, https://gopforukraine.com/ukraine-report-card/.

19. U.S. Senate, “Roll Call Vote 48: H.R. 815 - National Security Act, 2024,” February 13, 2024, https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1182/vote_118_2_00048.htm.

20. U.S. Senate, “Roll Call Vote 154: H.R. 815 - Senate Agreement to House Amendment,” April 23, 2024.

21. EveryCRSReport.com, “Fact Sheet: Congressional Votes in Response to the Russia-Ukraine War,” updated September 2024, https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R48195.html.

22. House Armed Services Committee, “Hearing on Defense Industrial Base Capacity,” testimony by Mike Rogers (R-AL-03), March 2024.

---

DEFENSE CONTRACTORS - INVESTOR RELATIONS AND FINANCIAL FILINGS

23. Lockheed Martin Corporation, “Quarterly Earnings Call Transcript - Q3 2024,” October 22, 2024, https://investors.lockheedmartin.com

24. Lockheed Martin Corporation, “Form 10-K Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2023,” filed February 8, 2024, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

25. Lockheed Martin Corporation, “Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for Quarter Ending September 30, 2024,” filed October 24, 2024, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

26. RTX Corporation (formerly Raytheon Technologies), “2023 Annual Report - Form 10-K,” filed February 6, 2024, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

27. RTX Corporation, “Q2 2024 Earnings Call Transcript,” July 23, 2024.

28. General Dynamics Corporation, “2023 Annual Report - Form 10-K,” filed February 7, 2024, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

29. General Dynamics Corporation, “Investor Presentation - Q4 2024,” January 2025.

30. BAE Systems plc, “Annual Report 2023,” filed March 2024, https://investors.baesystems.com

31. BAE Systems Inc., “Media Fact Sheet: U.S. Operations,” accessed January 2026.

32. Northrop Grumman Corporation, “2024 Annual Report - Form 10-K,” filed February 2025, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

---

DEFENSE INDUSTRY PUBLICATIONS

33. Aaron Mehta and Jen Judson, “US Army Accelerates Artillery Shell Production to Meet Ukraine Demand,” Defense News, March 14, 2023.

34. Jen Judson, “Army to Double 155mm Artillery Shell Production by Year’s End,” Defense News, August 17, 2023.

35. Theresa Hitchens, “Army Hits 28,000 Monthly 155mm Production Goal, Eyes 100K by 2025,” Breaking Defense, August 29, 2024.

36. Ashley Roque, “Lockheed Martin Ramps HIMARS, GMLRS Production for Ukraine Demand,” Defense News, June 7, 2023.

37. Mike Stone, “Raytheon Expands Patriot, Stinger Production Lines,” Reuters, September 21, 2023.

38. Valerie Insinna, “Javelin Production Surges as Stockpiles Flow to Ukraine,” Defense News, May 4, 2023.

39. “Lima Tank Plant Workforce Expansion Reaches 777 New Hires,” Army Times, November 15, 2022.

40. Sydney J. Freedberg Jr., “Watervliet Arsenal Accelerates Cannon Tube Modernization,” Breaking Defense, July 18, 2023.

41. Justin Katz, “Pentagon Awards $1.1 Billion Contract for 155mm Shell Production Through 2028,” Breaking Defense, March 3, 2023.

42. “U.S. Defense Industrial Base Quarterly Review - Q4 2024,” National Defense Magazine, January 2025.

43. “Global Defense Procurement Tracker: Ukraine Impact Analysis,” Jane’s Defence Weekly, December 2024.

---

NEWS SOURCES - NATIONAL

44. Mike Stone and Phil Stewart, “U.S. Arms Makers See Long-Term Boost from Ukraine Weapons Demand,” Reuters, October 5, 2023.

45. Doug Cameron and Gordon Lubold, “Ukraine War Strains U.S. Weapons Stockpiles, Prompting Pentagon Production Push,” Wall Street Journal, January 17, 2023.

46. Doug Cameron, “Defense Contractors Expand Plants to Rebuild U.S. Arsenal,” Wall Street Journal, August 9, 2023.

47. Tony Capaccio, “Pentagon Contracts Show $50.9 Billion Flowing to Defense Industry for Ukraine Aid,” Bloomberg Government, December 2024.

48. Lara Seligman and Connor O’Brien, “How Ukraine Aid Became a Jobs Program for Red States,” Politico, November 14, 2023.

49. Karoun Demirjian and Dan Lamothe, “House Passes $95 Billion Aid Package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan,” Washington Post, April 20, 2024.

50. Karoun Demirjian, “How Every House Member Voted on Aid to Ukraine, Israel and More,” Washington Post, April 20, 2024 (interactive database).

51. Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt, “Ukraine’s Use of U.S. Weapons Drives Demand for Replacements,” New York Times, October 3, 2023.

52. Eric Lipton, “Defense Contractors See Windfall in Ukraine Aid Package,” New York Times, April 25, 2024.

---

NEWS SOURCES - LOCAL AND REGIONAL

53. Joseph Kohut, “Scranton Army Ammunition Plant Doubles Production Capacity,” Scranton Times-Tribune, August 14, 2024.

54. Joseph Kohut, “General Dynamics to Hire 60 More Workers at Scranton Ammo Plant,” Scranton Times-Tribune, March 3, 2023.

55. “BAE Systems York Facility Ramps Bradley Production,” York Daily Record, June 12, 2023.

56. Teresa Boeckel, “BAE Systems: Ukraine War Impact on York County Manufacturing,” York Daily Record, November 8, 2023.

57. Teri Webster, “General Dynamics Opens New Artillery Plant in Mesquite, Creating 125+ Jobs,” Dallas Morning News, December 8, 2023.

58. Dom DiFurio, “Grand Prairie Lockheed Martin Facility Wins $521 Million HIMARS Contract,” Dallas Business Journal, June 9, 2022.

59. Frank E. Lockwood, “Camden Defense Plants Expand Workforce by 200 for Ukraine Missile Production,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, January 19, 2023.

60. Noel Oman, “Aerojet Rocketdyne Completes $180 Million Camden Expansion,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, April 7, 2023.

61. Jim Tankersley, “Lima Tank Plant Hires 777 Workers as Ukraine Aid Drives Demand,” Lima News, November 10, 2022.

62. “Lima’s Joint Systems Sees Largest Hiring Surge in Decade,” Lima News, December 2, 2022.

63. Brian Albrecht, “How Ukraine Aid Is Sustaining Ohio’s Defense Manufacturing,” Cleveland Plain Dealer, May 18, 2023.

64. Wendy Liberatore, “Watervliet Arsenal Expands Operations Amid Ukraine Demand,” Albany Times Union, July 6, 2023.

65. “Huntsville Aerojet Rocketdyne Facility Leases 379,000 Square Feet for Expansion,” Huntsville Times, February 14, 2023.

66. “Troy’s Defense Manufacturing Boom: Javelin Production Employs Hundreds,” Montgomery Advertiser, September 7, 2023.

67. David Wahlberg, “Middletown’s American Ordnance Expands Artillery Production,” Des Moines Register, May 22, 2023.

68. Meg Kinnard, “South Carolina Defense Contractors See $3.8 Billion from Ukraine Aid,” The State (Columbia, SC), January 10, 2025.

69. “Kentucky Defense Manufacturing Receives $1.7 Billion Investment,” Louisville Courier-Journal, January 12, 2025.

---

ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH SOURCES

70. Cynthia R. Cook et al., “The U.S. Defense Industrial Base: Past, Present, and Future” (Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2020).

71. Mark F. Cancian, “U.S. Military Forces in FY 2024: The Struggle to Modernize,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, November 2023.

72. William Greenwalt and Dan Patt, “Competing in Time: Ensuring Capability Advantage and Mission Success Through Adaptable Resource Allocation,” Hudson Institute, February 2021.

73. Seth G. Jones et al., “Empty Bins in a Wartime Environment: The Challenge to the U.S. Defense Industrial Base,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, January 2023.

---

ECONOMIC DATA AND ANALYSIS

74. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employment Situation Summary - Defense Manufacturing Sector,” various monthly releases, 2022-2024.

75. U.S. Census Bureau, “County Business Patterns: Defense Manufacturing Employment by County, 2023,” released June 2024.

76. Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, “Lackawanna County Employment Data - Manufacturing Sector,” December 2024.

77. Texas Workforce Commission, “Dallas-Fort Worth Defense Manufacturing Employment Report,” Q4 2024.

78. Arkansas Department of Workforce Services, “Ouachita County Economic Profile,” 2024.

79. Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, “Allen County Manufacturing Sector Analysis,” November 2024.

---

NONPROFIT AND ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION SOURCES

80. “Ukraine Defense Manufacturing Impact Map,” Mission Ukraine (uamission.com), accessed January 24, 2026, https://uamission.com/international-assistance/united-states-and-ukraine/american-weapons-systems/.

81. “GOP Ukraine Report Card,” GOP for Ukraine, accessed January 24, 2026, https://gopforukraine.com/ukraine-report-card/.

82. “American Weapons Systems Supporting Ukraine,” Mission Ukraine, multiple weapon system pages, accessed January 2026.

83. “USAI Contract Awards Database,” Mission Ukraine, accessed January 2026, https://uamission.com/international-assistance/united-states-and-ukraine/us-defense-industrial-base-supporting-ukraine/usai-contract-awards/.

---

BIOGRAPHICAL AND POLITICAL SOURCES

84. “Rep. Jim Jordan Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026, https://bioguide.congress.gov

85. “Rep. Lance Gooden Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026.

86. “Rep. Scott Perry Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026.

87. “Rep. Barry Moore Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026.

88. “Rep. Mike Rogers (Alabama) Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026.

89. “Rep. Bruce Westerman Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026.

90. “Rep. Elise Stefanik Biography,” Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress, accessed January 24, 2026.

91. GovTrack.us, “Members of Congress Voting Records Database,” accessed January 2026, https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members.

92. Ballotpedia, “Congressional District Profiles and Voting Records,” accessed January 2026, https://ballotpedia.org

---

INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS AND TRADE GROUPS

93. National Defense Industrial Association, “Industrial Base Capacity Report 2024,” January 2025.

94. Aerospace Industries Association, “Defense Manufacturing Workforce Survey 2024,” December 2024.

95. National Association of Manufacturers, “Defense Sector Economic Impact Study,” November 2024.

---

TECHNICAL AND SPECIFICATIONS SOURCES

96. U.S. Army Field Manual 6-40, “Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Field Artillery Manual Cannon Gunnery,” April 1996 (declassified sections).

97. Jane’s Ammunition Handbook, “155mm Artillery Projectiles - Production Requirements and Specifications,” 2023-2024 edition.

98. “M777 Lightweight Howitzer: Technical Specifications and Service Requirements,” GlobalSecurity.org, accessed January 2026.

99. “HIMARS: System Description and Operational Capabilities,” Center for Strategic and International Studies Missile Defense Project, accessed January 2026.

---

ECONOMIC IMPACT METHODOLOGY SOURCES

100. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II): User Guide,” December 2023.

101. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Methodology for Computing Regional Economic Multipliers,” technical documentation, 2024.

102. Congressional Budget Office, “The Economic Effects of Increases in Defense Spending,” June 2019.

---

SUPPLEMENTARY GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS

103. U.S. Department of State, “U.S. Security Cooperation with Ukraine Fact Sheet,” updated monthly, 2022-2024.

104. White House, “Fact Sheet: U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine,” multiple releases, 2022-2024.

105. Office of Management and Budget, “Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2025: Department of Defense,” February 2024.

106. U.S. Army, “Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Justification: Procurement of Ammunition, Army,” April 2023.

---

ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES

107. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), “SIPRI Arms Transfers Database: Transfers to Ukraine 2022-2024,” accessed January 2026.

108. Kiel Institute for the World Economy, “Ukraine Support Tracker,” updated monthly, accessed January 2026, https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/.

109. Institute for the Study of War, “Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment,” daily updates 2022-2024

---

VERIFICATION AND CROSS-REFERENCE SOURCES

110. Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), contract award database, accessed via USASpending.gov, January 2026.

111. Defense Contract Management Agency, “Contractor Performance Reports Database,” accessed January 2026.

112. LinkedIn Employment Data, “Defense Manufacturing Hiring Trends 2022-2024,” aggregated job posting data, accessed January 2026.