Project M: $37 Million in Earmarks for a Navy Project With No Military Use
Project M, a magnetic levitation technology from Vibration & Sound Solutions Ltd. (VSSL) of Alexandria, Va., got about $37 million in congressional earmarks over roughly a decade, even though the Pentagon never adopted it. A June 2006 Washington Post report said the money stopped that year. The case became a common example in the earmark debate. After Republicans won the House in the 2010 elections, Congress stopped earmarking starting in 2011. Earmarks came back in 2021 under new names: Community Project Funding in the House and Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate. As of November 2026, members must post every request online and certify that they have no financial stake in it. House rules also bar a for-profit company like VSSL from receiving an earmark at all.
What the Post reported in 2006
The Post found that a small defense contractor kept getting federal money through earmarks long after the Navy said it had no use for the product. Over about ten years, VSSL received a steady flow of contracts to work on Project M. The money came from yearly earmarks by supporters such as Rep. James P. “Jim” Moran Jr. (D-Va.), whose Northern Virginia district included the company.
From the Washington Post:
Project M, a technology involving magnetic levitation, was conceived as a way to keep submarine machinery quieter, was later marketed as a way to keep Navy SEALs safer in their boats and, in the end, was examined as a possible way to protect Marines from roadside bombs.
All the applications have one thing in common: The Pentagon hasn’t wanted them.
The Post said analysts who followed earmarking saw the company as an example of a common problem. Once a promising but speculative program got started, it was hard to end. Three groups kept it alive: members of Congress protecting jobs in their districts, military officials who wanted to keep their options open, and business owners trying to keep their companies going.
What the Navy official said
Paul M. Lowell was a civilian Navy employee. For a time he oversaw VSSL’s work as chief of staff in the Office of Naval Research. He told the Post that Project M “seemed to me a solution looking for a problem the Navy might have.”
“But it kept failing to solve any problems the Navy had,” Lowell said. “It looked at first as if it might have some merit. But we found out quickly it didn’t really solve the problems. And the company wasn’t very responsive and wasn’t very robust…. It was living entirely” on grants from Congress.
Lowell said Project M would not have lasted as long if it had been an internal Navy program, because the Navy’s scientific projects go through peer review.
Timeline of Project M
- Mid-1990s: Project M starts as a way to make submarine machinery quieter.
- 2001: The Navy rejects Project M for use in submarines.
- Early 2000s: The company markets the technology to protect Navy SEALs in their boats. Earmarked contracts keep coming. A 2003 federal contract notice lists a $4,371,921 award for an “Advanced Development Model for Project M Active Shock Mitigation Seat.”
- Mid-2000s: The technology is studied as a possible way to protect Marines from roadside bombs.
- 2006: The Post reports that Moran and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), then chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, kept money going to the company until that year. The total reached about $37 million.
Both parties funded it
Members of both parties backed the project. Moran told the Post the company’s 25 or so jobs mattered to his district. Hunter, a Republican and the House’s top defense authorizer at the time, also kept funding it. NBC News, covering the same story in 2006, reported that the company’s president and his wife had given $17,000 to Moran’s campaigns since the project began. The Sunlight Foundation, a transparency group, reported the same figure.
How one blog reacted
PrairiePundit, a conservative blog, posted the Post excerpt in 2006 and criticized Moran sharply. The blog called him one of the worst members of Congress and attacked his opposition to the Iraq war. It said he was spending defense money on a project with no value to win votes at home. It urged Republicans to try hard to defeat him, even though his district leaned heavily Democratic.
That was the blog’s opinion, not a finding. The Post’s reporting named both a Democrat and a Republican as the project’s backers, and the blog’s comments focused only on Moran. Reactions like this were common in 2006. Bloggers on the right and the left were posting earmark stories, and a coalition of bloggers called PorkBusters was pushing Congress to publish earmarks and cut them back.
What happened to the people involved
Both lawmakers were later out of Congress, and neither left because of Project M. Moran won reelection several times. He did not run in 2014 and left the House in January 2015. Hunter ran for president in 2008 and left the House in January 2009. His son, Duncan D. Hunter, took over the San Diego-area seat.
How earmark rules changed after Project M
Earmarking today runs under much tighter rules than when Project M got its money. Each of the main problems in the Post’s story is now covered by a specific rule. Disclosure started in 2007. The House and Senate then adopted earmark moratoriums beginning in 2011, and earmarking resumed in 2021 for fiscal year 2022. The version that came back was narrower.
The disclosure rules of 2007
In 2007 the House and Senate first required members to put their names on earmarks. The Senate rule is Rule XLIV. Members also had to certify in writing that they and their immediate families had no financial interest in the projects they asked for. Before then, many earmarks, including defense research earmarks like Project M’s, were hard to trace to a sponsor.
The moratorium, 2011 to 2021
After the 2010 elections, House Republicans adopted an earmark ban for the 112th Congress (2011-2012). The Senate followed. Congress kept the moratorium for a decade. Supporters said it saved money and reduced the risk of corruption. Critics, from both parties, said it gave spending decisions to executive agencies and made it harder to pass bills.
Earmarks return in 2021
Earmarks came back for fiscal year 2022 under the House Appropriations Committee, chaired by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), and the Senate committee, chaired by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The new rules address the problems seen in the Project M case:
| Issue in the Project M case | Rule as of November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Money went to a for-profit contractor | House Community Project Funding cannot go to for-profit recipients. Only state and local governments and eligible nonprofits qualify. |
| Sponsors were hard to identify | Each request is posted online with the member’s name, the recipient and the amount. |
| Donations from the contractor’s owners | Members must certify that they and their families have no financial interest in the project. |
| No limit on total earmarks | The House set a cap of about 1 percent of discretionary spending. |
| Defense research earmarks with no agency support | Each member can submit only a limited number of requests, and only for eligible accounts. Both committees publish tables of approved projects. |
House Republicans kept earmarks after taking the majority in 2023 but added limits. In 2024, for example, they made nonprofits ineligible for Community Project Funding in the HUD Economic Development Initiative account.
What earmarks cost now
Earmarks are bigger again, but they remain a small share of the budget. CQ Roll Call counted nearly $15.5 billion in fiscal 2026 earmarks as of February 2026, before Homeland Security projects were added. Citizens Against Government Waste, which uses a broader definition that includes items with no named sponsor, counted $23.7 billion in its 2026 Congressional Pig Book.
For fiscal 2027, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation counted 11,472 separate Senate earmark requests worth $46.47 billion after removing duplicates. These are requests, and enacted amounts are usually much lower. None of the 12 regular fiscal 2027 bills has been enacted. The government is running on the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2027 (P.L. 119-103), signed September 2, 2026, which funds agencies through December 11, 2026. A stopgap like this generally does not fund new earmarks, so fiscal 2027 projects will wait until the lame-duck Congress or the next Congress, which starts January 3, 2027, passes full-year bills.
FAQ
What was Project M?
Project M was a magnetic levitation technology from Vibration & Sound Solutions Ltd. of Alexandria, Va. It was first designed to make submarine machinery quieter, and the company later pitched it to protect Navy SEALs and Marines. According to the Washington Post, it received about $37 million in earmarks over a decade, and the Pentagon never adopted any of its uses.
Who sponsored the Project M earmarks?
The Post named Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), whose district included the company, and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), who chaired the House Armed Services Committee from 2003 to 2007. Moran said the company’s roughly 25 jobs mattered to his district. Funding stopped in 2006.
Could a company like VSSL get an earmark today?
Not in the House. Community Project Funding rules bar for-profit recipients and limit funds to state and local governments and eligible nonprofits. Members must also post requests publicly and certify that they and their families have no financial interest in the project.
When were earmarks banned, and when did they come back?
Congress stopped earmarking in 2011, starting with the 112th Congress, after House Republicans adopted a ban. Earmarks returned in 2021 for fiscal year 2022. The House calls them Community Project Funding and the Senate calls them Congressionally Directed Spending.
How much does Congress spend on earmarks now?
CQ Roll Call counted nearly $15.5 billion in fiscal 2026 earmarks as of February 2026, and Citizens Against Government Waste counted $23.7 billion under a broader definition. Either figure is a small share of the federal discretionary budget, which is well over $1 trillion a year.
Where can earmark requests be looked up?
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees publish members’ requests and tables of approved projects, and each member posts their own requests online. USAspending.gov shows how much money agencies have actually paid out to recipients.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service, Overview of Continuing Appropriations for FY2027 (Congress.gov)
- CRS Appropriations Status Table: FY2027 (Congress.gov)
- Sunlight Foundation, “Moran’s Earmarks” (2006)
- NBC News, “$37 million for project military doesn’t want?” (2006)
- CQ Roll Call, “Earmarks flood spending bills after a year’s hiatus” (2026)
- Citizens Against Government Waste, 2026 Congressional Pig Book
- National Taxpayers Union Foundation, Tracking FY 2027 Senate Earmark Requests
About this article
- Fact-checked before publication.
- Published · Updated
