M O R E M O N E Y ,

The Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account — nominally meant to fund the Iraq and Afghan wars — was used to pay for hundreds of billions of dollars worth of items unrelated to the wars, as a way to evade the caps on the Pentagon’s regular budget contained in the BCA.4 Advocates of ever–higher Pentagon budgets often attempt to dismiss the large absolute increases in military spending in favo. [...] The only winners have been the contractors on which the Navy relies for sustaining these ships.42 As in the case of the LCS, major arms contractors routinely grease the wheels for access and influence in Congress with campaign contributions, to the tune of over $83 million in the past two election cycles.43 The donations are concentrated on members who have the most power to help them garner fundi. [...] As for the geographic spread of the impact of the F–35, most of the economic benefits go to a relatively small number of states and localities. [...] 29 | Pentagon Spending and Strategy in the Biden Administration The revolving door Beyond campaign contributions and the jobs card, one of the industry’s strongest tools of influence is the infamous revolving door between government and the weapons sector. [...] Unfortunately, at the moment the military element is being overplayed while the reassurance aspect is underdeveloped.88 The military deterrence element of the strategy should follow the approach of “active denial” that has been described in a Quincy Institute report that was the product of a task force of defense and regional experts of diverse views and backgrounds.89 Active denial involves raisi.