Why It Matters

Stratasys is betting on a once-in-a-generation policy moment for domestic manufacturing. The Pentagon’s 3D printing budget jumped 83 percent to $3.3 billion in FY 2026, while Congress has passed legislation restricting the Defense Department from using foreign-made additive manufacturing equipment. These moves reflect acute concerns about supply chain vulnerability to China and geopolitical competition.

For Stratasys, the question is not whether federal demand exists—it clearly does—but whether the company can secure its share of unprecedented appropriations. The company’s last quarter lobbying focuses on embedding 3D printing into defense budgets, STEM education funding, and manufacturing modernization initiatives. Success means federal contracts and favorable industrial policy; failure means watching competitors like 3D Systems capture the expanding market.

By the Numbers

Stratasys Ltd. returned to federal lobbying in 2020 after a four-year hiatus, shifting from Cassidy & Associates Inc. to Holland & Knight LLP. This current phase totals $1.34 million across 24 filings through Q4 2025, representing a strategic shift from reactive regulatory defense to proactive federal investment seeking.

The Q4 2025 filing maintained an $80,000 investment, consistent with prior quarters. The three-person lobbying team balances specialized expertise: Meital Stavinsky leads continuity across all 24 filings since 2020, Robert Hunt Bradner brings healthcare and education appropriations experience, and Daniel J. Sennott provides critical defense relationships as former Staff Director for the House Armed Services Committee Minority.

The Agenda

Stratasys is targeting education, defense, and manufacturing priorities in its fourth quarter 2025 disclosure filing. The company seeks federal funding for 3D printing technology within FY 2025 and FY 2026 Defense Department Appropriations bills, while advocating for STEM education funding and 3D-printing certification programs through Labor-HHS-Education appropriations.

The congressional environment appears receptive. Legislation like the Future of Defense Manufacturing Act would restrict DoD from using foreign-made additive manufacturing equipment. H.R.5190 aims to incorporate commercial additive manufacturing into contested logistics programs.

Members including Senator Angus King and Senator Elissa Slotkin have championed 3D printing investments for defense applications, while Representatives Bill Foster and Mark Takano introduced a National 3D Printing Day resolution.

Broader Context

Congress and the Pentagon are aggressively prioritizing domestic additive manufacturing. The Defense Department allocated $3.3 billion to additive manufacturing in FY 2026—an 83 percent increase from $1.8 billion in FY 2025. Congress has moved protective legislation while the U.S. reshored nearly 240,000 manufacturing jobs in 2025.

However, federal STEM education funding faces significant cuts under the FY 2026 budget request, though Pentagon-funded workforce training remains robust.

Between The Lines

Multiple bills directly benefit Stratasys’s agenda. The Future of Defense Manufacturing Act would restrict Pentagon procurement of foreign-made equipment, while H.R.5190 seeks to integrate commercial additive manufacturing into military logistics.

Congressional committees are reinforcing momentum through targeted hearings on domestic manufacturing revival, with bipartisan member support across multiple committees highlighting 3D printing’s economic and security benefits.

Competitive Landscape

Stratasys faces competition but benefits from an expanding market. The Oregon Institute of Technology is lobbying for similar education funding, while 3D Systems secured a $7.65 million Air Force contract, demonstrating genuine Pentagon demand.

The legislative framework means Stratasys’s success doesn’t require defeating competitors—it requires expanding the overall federal market for domestic 3D printing technology.

The Bottom Line

Stratasys is positioning its 3D printing technology within defense and education budgets through steady $80,000 quarterly lobbying investments. The addition of former House Armed Services Committee staff director Sennott significantly strengthens defense policy access. Congressional interest remains bipartisan, with active legislation favoring domestic manufacturers, though competitive pressure exists from other firms pursuing similar federal contracts.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.