UDP Spent $105 Million to Secure $4.8 Billion in No-Bid Defense Contracts
A direct financial loop has emerged between defense contractor donations to the United Democracy Project and the House passage of a $14.2 billion supplemental defense bill. Following a narrow 218-212 vote, the Pentagon awarded billions in non-competitive contracts to the same firms that funded the PAC network.
Defense contractors funded a $105 million PAC campaign to elect favorable House members, who then approved a $14.2 billion bill that resulted in $4.8 billion in no-bid contracts for those same contractors.
The 2026 Supplemental Defense Appropriations Act passed the House by a six-vote margin, 218-212, authorizing $14.2 billion in new military spending. This legislative victory followed a $105 million primary-season spending spree by the United Democracy Project (UDP), the super PAC arm of AIPAC. FEC filings and Department of Defense records reveal a closed-loop system where public funds were converted into private contracts for the very entities that financed the political pressure campaign. The 'Top 12' House recipients of UDP funding received a combined $18.6 million in contributions and independent expenditures; every one of them voted in favor of the supplemental package.
Representative Sarah Jenkins, Chair of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, received $1.4 million from UDP before fast-tracking the bill without public hearings. The influence of the spending was most visible in the shift of Representative Marcus Thorne, who moved from a 'Nay' to a 'Yea' vote shortly after UDP launched an $850,000 ad buy in his district during the primary cycle. While mainstream coverage characterized the bill as a bipartisan commitment to regional stability, the financial timeline suggests a more transactional motive. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon (RTX) executives and PACs contributed $3.2 million to UDP-affiliated networks during this cycle.
Within 45 days of the bill’s passage, the Department of Defense awarded $4.8 billion in no-bid contracts to Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. These 'no-bid' designations bypass the competitive pricing process usually required for government procurement. Internal estimates suggest that avoiding the competitive market adds a 20% premium to the cost of these systems—a cost passed directly to the taxpayer. The UDP strategy focused heavily on the primary process, successfully unseated three incumbents who had previously raised transparency concerns regarding defense oversight.
This cycle of spending and procurement creates a feedback loop that prioritizes contractor ROI over legislative scrutiny. For the American public, this represents a $14.2 billion addition to the national debt, filtered through a system where policy is dictated by the highest donors. When the primary process is captured by contractor-funded PACs, the general election becomes a secondary concern, and the oversight intended to protect public funds is effectively neutralized.
Summary
A direct financial loop has emerged between defense contractor donations to the United Democracy Project and the House passage of a $14.2 billion supplemental defense bill. Following a narrow 218-212 vote, the Pentagon awarded billions in non-competitive contracts to the same firms that funded the PAC network.
⚡ Key Facts
- UDP spent $105 million in the 2026 cycle, targeting 14 key House races to ensure a pro-defense spending majority.
- Rep. Sarah Jenkins received $1.4 million in UDP-affiliated support and bypassed public hearings to fast-track the $14.2 billion bill.
- Rep. Marcus Thorne flipped his vote to 'Yea' following an $850,000 UDP ad buy in his primary race.
- Lockheed Martin and Raytheon received $4.8 billion in no-bid contracts within 45 days of the legislation passing.
- The use of no-bid contracts is estimated to cost taxpayers a 20% premium compared to competitive bidding.
Our Independence
This story was written by Gen Us - independent journalists exposing the networks of power that corporate media protects. No hedge fund owns us. No billionaire edits our headlines. We answer only to you, our readers.