Aff - DIB - CNDI 2024

Defense Industry Affirmative
Notes
The likely implementation of the plan is reducing the DOD’s use of “unlimited rights” and “government purpose rights” requirements on the core commercial intellectual property of domestic defense contractors.
1AC
1ac – Plan
Plan v2: The United States federal government should significantly strengthen its protection of the intellectual property rights of domestic defense contractors.
1ac – Economy Advantage
The defense industry is in decline – there’s a lack of investment and rampant consolidation.
NDIA 23, 02-10-2023, “Vital Signs 2023: Posturing the U.S. Defense Industrial Base for Great Power Competition," Pg. 5, National Defense Industrial Association, https://www.ndia.org/-/media/sites/ndia/policy/vital-signs/2023/ndia_vitalsigns2023_final_v3.pdf, accessed 6/26/2024 // QUEERAMID
The capacity of the U.S. defense industrial base to grow its output, fulfill a surge in military demands, and reconstitute in a major conflict stands as a key test of its health and readiness. There is a mismatch between what our national strategies aim to achieve and how our defense industrial base is postured. Key industrial readiness indicators for great power competition are going in the wrong direction: Fewer People. In 1985, the U.S. had 3 million workers in the defense industry.2 By 2021, the U.S. had 1.1 million workers in the sector. Fewer Companies. In the last five years, the defense ecosystem has lost a net 17,045 companies3 and the Department of Defense estimates the number of small businesses participating in the defense industrial base has declined by over 40% in the last decade.4 A Shrinking Financial Commitment. From 1985 to 2021, national defense spending dropped from 5.8% to 3.2% of U.S. GDP5, and the Congressional Budget Office projects a further decline to 2.7% by 2032.6 Less Predictability. In 13 of the last 14 years, the federal government has operated under a continuing resolution (CR) for part of the year, preventing new starts essential for modernization and delaying increased production rates, multi-year procurement authorities, and advanced procurement funding essential for building capacity. Limited Surge Capacity. A lack of investment in infrastructure, equipment, idle capacity, and tooling, as well as an over-reliance on sole source suppliers, challenges both the readiness and the reconstitution of industry. The federal government must prioritize removing policies, regulations and authorities that are strangling the defense industrial base and make significant, sustained and predictable financial investments to rebuild the DIB’s strategic endurance and resilience. In the Vital Signs 2023 survey, NDIA member companies are emphasizing that the federal acquisition process is growing more – not less – cumbersome; the lack of budget stability is breaking companies and causing significant workforce uncertainty; and the challenges of finding and retaining talent are impacting even our most strategic defense programs. The current inflation level was also highlighted as a cross-cutting issue impacting both the acquisition process and workforce management. Strong defense industrial readiness – ensuring our warfighters have everything they need so they never engage in a fair fight – is a key element of national deterrence. And if conflict ever erupted, national leaders will only have credible response options if they inherit the right investments to the DIB from this current generation of leaders. The government and the private sector must adapt, together, to address these challenges.
Defense industry is key to the economy – it affects manufacturing, jobs, and supply chains.
O’Neil et al 16 [Brendan O’Neil, Managing Director, Shane Norton, Director Leslie Levesque, Senior Consultant, Charlie Dougherty, Consultant, Vardan Genanyan, Consultant, “Aerospace and Defense Economic Impact Analysis: A report for the Aerospace Industries Association”, IHS Economics, April 2016, https://www.aia-aerospace.org/report/aerospace-and-defense-an-economic-impact-analysis/]
The U.S. Aerospace & Defense industry is a global leader in innovation and significant component of the nation’s advanced manufacturing base of industries. IHS was commissioned to quantify the economic contributions of the U.S. Aerospace and Defense (A&D) industry to the U.S. economy and provide enhanced understanding of the industry’s extensive supply chain, by economic sector at the national and state level. The key findings of this study measure the economic contribution the A&D industry makes in terms of employment, value added (contribution to GDP), sales (output), labor income and taxes within the broader economy. In 2015, the U.S. economy posted $30.7 trillion in total sales activity; of that total, IHS estimates that $786 billion was supported by the A&D industry’s economic activity. This occurred through approximately $349 billion in direct sales activity, which initiated additional activity as dollars flowed through the A&D supply chain. This “multiplier effect” drove an additional $256 billion in indirect sales. Further, companies and their suppliers hired and paid employees, who, in turn, consumed goods and services in the economy. These induced effects amounted to $181 billion in 2015. The graphic below depicts this flow of economic impacts. The sales activity generated by the A&D industry triggers additional economic benefits – workers must be hired and retained in order to deliver goods and services; companies reap additional profits and make larger contributions to GDP; and both companies and their employees must pay taxes. In this realm, IHS estimates that in 2015 the A&D industry fueled the following contributions to the U.S. economy:  The U.S. A&D industry directly and indirectly employed 1.7 million workers engaged in the design and production of end-user goods and services and within the industry’s supply chain. About two-thirds of those workers were split about evenly between the civilian aviation and the defense/national security sector.  More specifically, within the A&D industry about 531,030 workers were employed in the design, manufacture and supply chain of civil and general aviation aircraft, helicopters and space systems. Since 2013, employment in the sector has decreased by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of -0.38%, or by a net of 6,100 jobs.  Another 510,570 jobs were focused on the design, manufacture and supply chain of end-use military aircraft, ground and sea systems, armaments and space systems. Since 2013, the segment’s employment base experienced overall stability, decreasing by a CAGR of -0.03%, or a net loss of less than 1,000 jobs.  Jobs supported by the A&D industry represent approximately two percent of the nation’s total employment base.  Direct A&D industry jobs combined with those supported in the industry’s supply chain represented 13 percent of the nation’s manufacturing employment base.  For every million dollars in direct sales activity, eight employees are supported throughout the supply chain and across economic sectors.  The A&D industry generated $300 billion in economic value, which represented 1.8 percent of total nominal GDP in the U.S.  The output supported by the A&D industry directly and through the supply chain represented about 10 percent of manufacturing output in the U.S.  Labor income supported by the A&D industry represented about 2.3 percent of the nation’s total labor income.  The average labor income per job within the A&D industry (both producers of end-use goods and services as well as the supply chain) amounted to just over $93,000 – or approximately 44 percent above the national average – reflecting the highly skilled nature of the workforce.  The contribution to tax receipts from the A&D industry was $63 billion, or about 1.7 percent of the total tax revenues received by the federal and state and local governments. The U.S. A&D industry is a broad complex of firms performing a variety of functions including service delivery in support of operations and the manufacturing of goods and of materials, components, systems and platforms for civil aviation, space, and national security applications. For the purposes of this analysis, the A&D industry is defined by a set of associated sectors categorized under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) that include firms that produce goods and services for end use by A&D industry customers, while other sub-sectors are predominately comprised of suppliers that support production. These two primary groupings are described as having a ‘direct’ or ‘indirect’ impact on the economy; firms that engage in producing goods and services for end use are considered to have a ‘direct’ impact on the economy (for a list of these sectors, see Table 1 in the Approach and Methodology section of this report), while firms in the supply chain are considered to have an ‘indirect’ impact on the economy (for a list of these sectors, see Table 2 in the Approach and Methodology section of this report). Further, firms supplying to ‘direct’ manufacturers are classified as ‘tier I’ and firms supplying to the ‘tier I’ suppliers are classified as ‘tier II’. In addition to this tiered classification, there is a portion of the supplier base that does not fall within the A&D industry. As a point of reference, firms that supply management consulting, transportation services or office equipment to the tier I and II A&D-supplier community do not constitute the A&D supplier base, but are included as part of the industry’s indirect and induced impact (for a list of these sectors, see Table 3 in the Approach and Methodology section of this report). The A&D industry is a vital component of the US economy, not solely for the role the industry plays in national security, transportation and technological innovation, but also because its influence spans many sectors and every state throughout the country. From commercial airliners to military vehicle manufacturing, the A&D industry calls upon businesses across the nation to supply goods and services for end-use production. From these transactions, the A&D industry supported an average of nearly 2.8 million jobs between 2013 and 2015, representing approximately two percent of total U.S. employment and produced an average of $301 billion in total economic value, or 1.8 percent of nominal U.S. GDP. For much of the previous five decades, the U.S. manufacturing base has experienced a continuous and sometimes precipitous decline as global market forces drove firms to close, downsize, or relocate abroad. The manufacturing segments associated with A&D have certainly not been immune to this trend; however, over the past several years, strong growth in international markets has driven resurgence in the sector, which has helped accelerate the country’s recent economic recovery. Over the past five years, the U.S. manufacturing industry has enjoyed an average annual growth rate in payrolls of 1.5 percent. Meanwhile, the transportation manufacturing sector, which includes the manufacture of ships, aircraft, and locomotives, posted an average annual growth rate in payrolls of 3.6 percent – outpacing the 1.7 percent growth rate of total non-farm payrolls over that same period. The economic impact of the A&D industry goes well beyond the companies directly involved in the production of finished goods. The lengthy process of bringing these products to market supports a variety of services that are critical to the success of the industry. The A&D value chain extends throughout the US – from engineering and research and development efforts to the highly capital intensive sectors that provide raw and intermediate materials and components. The result is an extended network of companies that forge and fabricate metal, design and build complex systems, and assemble the finished goods that are ultimately required by the industry. Furthermore, the economic activity associated with end use and supply chain ripple out to a broader set of economic sectors as wages earned are spent across the economy, benefitting sectors ranging from retail trade to the leisure and hospitality sector. The A&D industry drives economic growth at the local level as well, as many states across the United States depend heavily on the jobs and incomes created by the aerospace and defense industry. From the aerospace manufacturers and suppliers in Washington and Southern California to the defense contractors in Texas and Washington DC/Northern Virginia area, the A&D industry serves as an economic keystone that not only creates jobs and boosts wages, but also provides a reliable stream of tax revenue for state and local governments.
US economic decline causes war—economic fragmentation and populism
Sundaram and Popov 19 (Jomo Kwame Sundaram, a former economics professor, was United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development, and received the Wassily Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought. Vladimir Popov is a Research Director at the Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute in Berlin. “Economic Crisis Can Trigger World War” 2/12/2019. Accessed 6/18/2024. https://www.ipsnews.net/2019/02/economic-crisis-can-trigger-world-war/) wtk
Economic recovery efforts since the 2008-2009 global financial crisis have mainly depended on unconventional monetary policies. As fears rise of yet another international financial crisis, there are growing concerns about the increased possibility of large-scale military conflict.
More worryingly, in the current political landscape, prolonged economic crisis, combined with rising economic inequality, chauvinistic ethno-populism as well as aggressive jingoist rhetoric, including threats, could easily spin out of control and ‘morph’ into military conflict, and worse, world war.
Crisis responses limited
The 2008-2009 global financial crisis almost ‘bankrupted’ governments and caused systemic collapse. Policymakers managed to pull the world economy from the brink, but soon switched from counter-cyclical fiscal efforts to unconventional monetary measures, primarily ‘quantitative easing’ and very low, if not negative real interest rates.
But while these monetary interventions averted realization of the worst fears at the time by turning the US economy around, they did little to address underlying economic weaknesses, largely due to the ascendance of finance in recent decades at the expense of the real economy. Since then, despite promising to do so, policymakers have not seriously pursued, let alone achieved, such needed reforms.
Instead, ostensible structural reformers have taken advantage of the crisis to pursue largely irrelevant efforts to further ‘casualize’ labour markets. This lack of structural reform has meant that the unprecedented liquidity central banks injected into economies has not been well allocated to stimulate resurgence of the real economy.
From bust to bubble
Instead, easy credit raised asset prices to levels even higher than those prevailing before 2008. US house prices are now 8% more than at the peak of the property bubble in 2006, while its price-to-earnings ratio in late 2018 was even higher than in 2008 and in 1929, when the Wall Street Crash precipitated the Great Depression.
As monetary tightening checks asset price bubbles, another economic crisis — possibly more severe than the last, as the economy has become less responsive to such blunt monetary interventions — is considered likely. A decade of such unconventional monetary policies, with very low interest rates, has greatly depleted their ability to revive the economy.
The implications beyond the economy of such developments and policy responses are already being seen. Prolonged economic distress has worsened public antipathy towards the culturally alien — not only abroad, but also within. Thus, another round of economic stress is deemed likely to foment unrest, conflict, even war as it is blamed on the foreign.
International trade shrank by two-thirds within half a decade after the US passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930, at the start of the Great Depression, ostensibly to protect American workers and farmers from foreign competition!
Liberalization’s discontents
Rising economic insecurity, inequalities and deprivation are expected to strengthen ethno-populist and jingoistic nationalist sentiments, and increase social tensions and turmoil, especially among the growing precariat and others who feel vulnerable or threatened.
Thus, ethno-populist inspired chauvinistic nationalism may exacerbate tensions, leading to conflicts and tensions among countries, as in the 1930s. Opportunistic leaders have been blaming such misfortunes on outsiders and may seek to reverse policies associated with the perceived causes, such as ‘globalist’ economic liberalization.
Policies which successfully check such problems may reduce social tensions, as well as the likelihood of social turmoil and conflict, including among countries. However, these may also inadvertently exacerbate problems. The recent spread of anti-globalization sentiment appears correlated to slow, if not negative per capita income growth and increased economic inequality.
To be sure, globalization and liberalization are statistically associated with growing economic inequality and rising ethno-populism. Declining real incomes and growing economic insecurity have apparently strengthened ethno-populism and nationalistic chauvinism, threatening economic liberalization itself, both within and among countries.
Insecurity, populism, conflict
Thomas Piketty has argued that a sudden increase in income inequality is often followed by a great crisis. Although causality is difficult to prove, with wealth and income inequality now at historical highs, this should give cause for concern.
Of course, other factors also contribute to or exacerbate civil and international tensions, with some due to policies intended for other purposes. Nevertheless, even if unintended, such developments could inadvertently catalyse future crises and conflicts.
Publics often have good reason to be restless, if not angry, but the emotional appeals of ethno-populism and jingoistic nationalism are leading to chauvinistic policy measures which only make things worse.
At the international level, despite the world’s unprecedented and still growing interconnectedness, multilateralism is increasingly being eschewed as the US increasingly resorts to unilateral, sovereigntist policies without bothering to even build coalitions with its usual allies.
Avoiding Thucydides’ iceberg
Thus, protracted economic distress, economic conflicts or another financial crisis could lead to military confrontation by the protagonists, even if unintended. Less than a decade after the Great Depression started, the Second World War had begun as the Axis powers challenged the earlier entrenched colonial powers.
Independently, small defense contractors key to innovation and growth.
Todd Lopez, 2-16-2022, Writer and Editor at the U.S. Department of Defense, "DOD Report: Consolidation of Defense Industrial Base Poses Risks to National Security," U.S. Department of Defense, https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/2937898/dod-report-consolidation-of-defense-industrial-base-poses-risks-to-national-sec/tw
A report just released by the Defense Department reveals consolidation in the defense industrial base, which poses risks to national security. The report lays out a series of proposed efforts by the department — including finding ways to help more small businesses get involved — to help mitigate that risk. ¶ The "defense industrial base" refers to the collection of businesses, large and small, that DOD relies upon to provide the materials, equipment and weapons systems needed to defend the nation. ¶ In recent years, the report shows, the number of companies within the defense industrial base

Preview shortened. Download the file for the full document.