You are talking about a group of powerful politicians crafting legislation with a secret ulterior motive to transfer money to an unknown entity or entities in the military industrial complex. That's a pretty textbook conspiracy.
If you dig into the line items I'm sure there will be some compromises to get the maximum number of votes, but that's a far cry from an elaborate scheme to line the pockets of the military industrial complex.
It's not hard to imagine this bill passing on its own merits without heavy lobbying. No one in the 90s was going to want to be painted as anti-cop, pro-drug, pro-terrorist, and/or pro-government waste. Even if we now see the terrible consequences of police militarization, and many still don't, that's hindsight. At the height of the war on drugs, as children who grew up hearing about serial killers in the 70s were now worrying about their own young kids, taking the weapons that had been lying in warehouses since Nam and putting them to good use protecting the streets here at home had wide bipartisan support. It costs very little, makes people feel safe, and makes a lot of politicians look good.
Again it is good to question the official narrative, but your hypothesis needs to be falsifiable. You will always be able to go a layer deeper and say "oh well they did it this way to make it harder to see their real motive" but without evidence there is no reason to continue going down that rabbit hole.