What Is the Defense Production Act?

In Brief

What Is the Defense Production Act?

Presidents Trump and Biden have turned to the Defense Production Act to procure critical medical supplies during the coronavirus pandemic. What does the law do?

Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden both invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Cold War–era law gives the president significant emergency authority to control domestic industries. Trump used the law to crack down on hoarding, limit exports of medical goods, and increase production of critical supplies. Biden has used it to speed up vaccination and testing efforts.

What are the origins of the Defense Production Act?

More From Our Experts

Passed in September 1950 at the start of the Korean War, the DPA was modeled on the War Powers Acts of 1941 and 1942, which gave President Franklin D. Roosevelt sweeping authority [PDF] to control the domestic economy during World War II. The original DPA gave the president a broad set of powers, including the ability to set wages and prices, as well as ration consumer goods, though not all of these powers have been renewed. The law has been continually reauthorized by Congress, most recently in the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act of 2019. It is set to expire in 2025.

What does it do?

More on:

COVID-19

United States

Industrial Policy

China

The current version of the law still gives the executive branch substantial powers. It allows the president, largely through executive order, to direct private companies to prioritize orders from the federal government. The president is also empowered to “allocate materials, services, and facilities” for national defense purposes, and take actions to restrict hoarding of needed supplies. To bolster domestic production, the president may also offer loans or loan guarantees to companies, subject to an appropriation by Congress; make purchases or purchase commitments; and install equipment in government or private factories. Companies can also be authorized to coordinate with each other, which might otherwise violate antitrust laws.

The gloved hands of a General Motors worker building a ventilator in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Workers at a General Motors factory in Kokomo, Indiana, step up ventilator production in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. AJ Mast/General Motors

How has it previously been used?

U.S. presidents from Harry S. Truman to Barack Obama have delegated DPA powers to various parts of the government. In a 2012 executive order, Obama assigned DPA authority to sixteen federal departments and agencies.

The Defense Department has routinely used the law since 1950 to prioritize the fulfillment of its contracts, including for the president’s plane, Air Force One, and armored vehicles. The Pentagon estimates that it uses DPA authority to place roughly three hundred thousand orders per year for a variety of military-related equipment. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) also uses the law to respond to disasters, bumping its orders for items such as food and bottled water to the front of the line. The DPA was also used to supply natural gas to California during the 2000–2001 energy crisis.

More From Our Experts

How did Trump use the DPA to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic?

Trump employed a range of DPA powers. After initially hesitating, he ordered General Motors to produce ventilators and 3M to produce N95 respirator masks for the federal government. He issued an executive order to prevent hoarding of essential supplies and directed his administration to increase the domestic production capacity of essential health products. Responding to concerns about the supply of meat following several plant closures, Trump used DPA authority to ensure that meat processing plants remain open by declaring them “critical infrastructure.” Still, some experts criticized the Trump administration for not going far enough in using the law to secure an adequate supply of protective equipment, including masks. 

Trump also issued a directive “preventing the harmful export of critically needed” personal protective equipment (PPE). Such export restrictions are controversial, and this particular power had not been used since the Cold War. CFR Senior Fellow Jennifer Hillman has warned that they “work to the detriment of the world’s ability to distribute these scarce medical resources to where they are needed most with the minimal amount of red tape.”

More on:

COVID-19

United States

Industrial Policy

China

What is Biden doing?

In one of his first official acts as president, Biden signed an executive order directing his administration to identify shortfalls in the supply of materials needed for the pandemic response and use the DPA to address them, if necessary. The order also tasked the administration with ensuring adequate supplies for future pandemics, including by improving supply chains and expanding the Strategic National Stockpile

Since then, the Biden administration has used the DPA to spur vaccine production by helping manufacturers secure the equipment and components needed to make doses. It has also used the law to expand access to testing. In December 2021, the administration announced plans to distribute half a billion COVID-19 tests, leveraging the DPA to speed up production in response to the fast-spreading omicron variant of the coronavirus.

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Middle East and North Africa

CFR experts Steven A. Cook and David J. Scheffer join Amnesty International’s Agnes Callamard and Refugee International’s Jeremy Konyndyk to discuss the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Japan

The highlights from Kishida Fumio's busy week in Washington.

Genocide and Mass Atrocities

Thirty years ago, Rwanda’s government began a campaign to eradicate the country’s largest minority group. In just one hundred days in 1994, roving militias killed around eight hundred thousand people. Would-be killers were incited to violence by the radio, which encouraged extremists to take to the streets with machetes. The United Nations stood by amid the bloodshed, and many foreign governments, including the United States, declined to intervene before it was too late. What got in the way of humanitarian intervention? And as violent conflict now rages at a clip unseen since then, can the international community learn from the mistakes of its past?