The Department of Defense owns roughly 26.3 million acres of land across nearly 500 military installations around the United States. While the majority of the land on military installations is used to provide training areas for soldiers, depots to store equipment, or buildings to house military families, a significant portion of the land is perennially underutilized. A report from 2016 stated that 30% of DoD infrastructure was unutilized. More recently, the DoD’s 2023 Real Property Utilization and Disposal report listed over 40,000 excess buildings in the DoD’s care. Although the Government Accountability Office has criticized the DoD’s internal tracking system as unreliable, there is a significant excess of unused buildings or underutilized facilities on military installations.
Meanwhile, the U.S. defense industrial base has serious problems with domestic manufacturing for defense articles and dual-use technologies (e.g., autonomous systems). This deficit has various causes, ranging from increased costs of raw materials and labor, to market shifts resulting from trade agreements, to societal views around desired careers. In addition to these, some industries are hamstrung by the availability to lease or own sufficient industrial space, challenges navigating legal and regulatory regimes, security concerns, and having low overhead to purchase machinery or labor.
Since 2000, America has lost 6.7 million manufacturing jobs. Such a significant loss of American industrial output is a terrifying prospect given our inability to produce enough munitions to satisfy the minimum requirements of our military. Likewise, our adversaries in Russia and China have made significant increases in industrial output during this same period. When coupled together, the prospect of how long it takes for capital, raw materials, facilities, and labor to harmonize into production is daunting.
America’s manufacturing shortcomings could be reversed by an unexpected partner who ironically is also the end-user: the U.S. military.
The U.S. Government has an extremely rare opportunity to play matchmaker for the perfect couple; the government could allow U.S. companies to manufacture for free – or a nominal sum – on military bases by using the underutilized buildings on military installations sprinkled across America. This would provide cost savings for businesses, maximize costs for taxpayers, decrease the threat of industrial and supply chain security espionage, and improve domestic manufacturing outputs. Businesses would benefit from this arrangement because they could select a site that suits their business needs, leading to a reduction in capital expenditures, additional security for their facilities, and the ability to quickly and affordably deliver products for either testing or usage to the end-user. This configuration would remove burdensome state-level regulatory hurdles for businesses, expedite innovation and production cycles, and address the underutilization problem that seems to have no remedy in sight. Companies that opt for this program could also receive additional tax incentives, federal dollars for workforce development, grants and loans from the DoD to lease or purchase advanced machinery or AI-enabled tools, and preferential points when competing for contracts with the DoD.
The election of President Trump revived the business-minded leader at the helm of our government in Washington. This type of public-private alignment not only supports his government efficiency efforts, but also advances his employment targets and domestic manufacturing goals. Although different, using military installations to support domestic manufacturing for the defense industrial base largely mirrors his idea of having critical mineral and rare earth element processing facilities use federal lands, for many of the same reasons as mentioned above.
Ultimately, this type of program could serve as a catalyst to supercharge investment into domestic manufacturing, push investors into defense manufacturing and technologies, and create the most incentive-rich public-private partnership that has existed in American history. Such a program would help usher in America’s golden age in manufacturing and enhance competitiveness and resilience in American manufacturing.



