Anyone who has ever tried to get a sundae at McDonald’s knows the disappointment of hearing, “Sorry, the ice cream machine is broken.” But behind those words lies a deeper truth: Until recently, the company that made McDonald’s machines had exclusive rights to repair them. So, when a machine broke, there was nothing a local store could do but wait for the manufacturer.
The dysfunction with McDonald’s ice cream machines became so notorious that the Federal Trade Commission even took notice. Last November, the government introduced a new rule that allows outside vendors to fix commercial food equipment.
But shockingly, no such solution exists for the U.S. military, which faces the same problem.
Just like the McDonald’s stores that were forced to wait on the manufacturer to fix an ice cream machine, the Pentagon often does not have the right to repair the equipment it’s bought. Instead, companies are able to include provisions in their contracts that enable them to hold onto intellectual property rights, allowing only the manufacturer to perform repair and maintenance. These contractors may refuse to share essential tools or data, or they may invalidate the equipment’s warranty if service members undertake repairs.
This must change. Luckily, there is bipartisan and public support to do so. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has been pushing the military to secure right-to-repair provisions in its contracts. In January, she asked Daniel Driscoll, then-nominee for secretary of the Army, to commit to finding opportunities where the Army could save money by fixing its own equipment. On April 3, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth issued a memorandum that included directing the Army to identify and propose contract modifications for right-to-repair provisions, and to include these measures in all new contracts. That guidance should be taken up by the other branches of the military, but it should also be the law of the land. Congress should pass legislation to give service members the tools and the authority to repair their own equipment.
The Right to Repair
The main reason contractors retain the right to repair the equipment they sell the military is money. If the original contractor is the only one legally allowed to repair a system, it creates a massive, long-term revenue stream for contractors. When a part breaks or a system fails, the contractor can get paid, not just for the part, but for the labor and travel. In fact, according to the Government Accountability Office, “operating and support (O&S) costs historically account for approximately 70 percent of a weapon system’s total life-cycle cost.” This statistic rings true for the F-35 program, whose procurement cost is estimated at $442 billion compared to the $1.58 trillion estimated for operating and support costs.
Denying service members the right to repair their own equipment has serious consequences. The United States already spends well over $800 billion a year on defense, and repair restrictions drive up those costs even further — leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.
Worse, repair restrictions can jeopardize safety. Service members deserve to be able to focus on the mission they’ve been tasked and trained to do without having to waste time and energy determining who is contractually allowed to repair their weapons. When service members lose access to equipment for even a day it can undermine military readiness. Now imagine you’re a soldier or Marine without access to essential equipment for a week or more simply because your repairs are tethered to contractor availability.
The threats aren’t just hypothetical. In 2008, the Navy launched a new class of vessels known as littoral combat ships, warships for near-shore operations. But when some of these ships needed repairs at sea, sailors were not allowed to fix them. That’s because the manufacturers— General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin—labeled much of the equipment as proprietary. It took weeks for contractors to arrive and do repairs. The inability of sailors to repair these systems in a timely manner contributed to the derailment of missions, left vital systems malfunctioning longer than necessary, and pulled sailors away from their primary duties so that they could escort contractors around the vessel. And this wasn’t the first time that taxpayers had to cover contractors’ travel expenses to the ships, which ranged from a few thousand dollars to more than $1 million.
Unfortunately, there are many more examples like this. In the Air Force, critical F-35 repairs were delayed because contractors withheld technical data. In the Army, soldiers in Afghanistan had their lives put at risk when medical devices couldn’t be repaired. There are even reports of Marines being reprimanded for fixing their own equipment. And the list goes on.
Congressional Legislation
Corporate profits should never come before national security. The U.S. military must make a change. In reaction to this growing appetite for right-to-repair from both the DOD and voters, Senator Warren and Senator Tim Sheehy (R-MT) plan to introduce a bill that would ensure service members can repair their own equipment. This commonsense legislation would go a long way in demonstrating congressional support and respect for service members and taxpayers alike.
As a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, I know that the ability to adapt and overcome is at the heart of military service. As a member of the armed services, I was taught to fix what was broken and to never rely solely on someone else to save the day. On a 12+ hour mission hundreds or even thousands of miles away from any support staff, we had no other choice but to be self-reliant. It is time for U.S. military acquisition contracts to reflect that ethos.
When ice cream machines break, it’s inconvenient. But when a fighter jet or radar system goes down, it’s dangerous. Congress must act to reduce wasteful spending, improve safety, and strengthen military readiness by ensuring the right to repair. Don’t make U.S. troops wait for a contractor to pick up the phone — especially when lives are on the line.
