As Trump pushes for a massive $1.5T in defense spending, a few states brace for a windfall

WASHINGTON — Congress is considering a hike of hundreds of billions in dollars in defense spending, which would represent a surge in military funding not seen since World War II. 

Whatever the exact level of spending ultimately flows to military installations and defense contractors, some states will likely benefit far more than others, a States Newsroom analysis of federal defense data shows. Just a handful of states makes up a core of military production, topping the lists of federal defense spending, the data shows. 

President Donald Trump has requested a total Pentagon budget of $1.5 trillion, an unprecedented increase of 42% over the previous year. While that full sum is unlikely to pass Congress, it lays out his vision for defense.

The House and Senate are considering their own versions of the National Defense Authorization Act, which sets national defense policy. Both chambers propose boosting total base spending to $1.15 trillion, with Trump’s even bigger increases potentially targeted to come through the budget reconciliation process. 

Here’s where in the country a new round of defense funding may end up, and where it won’t, given historic spending patterns.

Where is defense spending typically concentrated? 

According to Defense Department data from fiscal years 2020 through 2024, three states have consistently reaped the most federal funding: Texas, California and Virginia. 

Each has received nearly $50 billion or more annually since the 2020 fiscal year. While other states such as Florida, Maryland and Connecticut rank in the top states by funding, none has cracked more than 10% of total Pentagon spending — which Texas, California and Virginia regularly reach. 

Matt Borron, executive director of the Association of Defense Communities, said that many communities with military installations will stand to benefit from a spending increase. But he said that funding often doesn’t prioritize infrastructure or maintenance issues, which he described as “low on the totem pole.” 

“A lot of times our communities are worried about the infrastructure that supports the mission, and even the installation itself,” he said. “The facilities on base, are they up to speed? Are they being maintained? Is the housing still adequate?” 

He said that, with the defense bill’s focus on building up the military’s industrial capabilities and workforce, many communities will likely see benefits from the funding. 

Borron, whose organization lobbies for communities with defense installations, said that it is important to invest in the right places. More money doesn’t necessarily mean a better product or faster product, he said. 

“National security starts at home,” he said. “You need these communities to be this innovation hub. You need it to have great quality of life, so servicemembers and their families want to live there.” 

Virginia, Connecticut lead per capita

When accounting for population, a handful of states receive a bigger share than others. 

Virginia, which neighbors the nation’s capital and is home to the Pentagon, and Connecticut, which houses several large shipbuilding and Navy facilities, received the most defense spending per resident in both 2020 and 2024, along with sitting near the top of the pile when it comes to overall DOD funding.

Maryland, which also neighbors the capital, Alaska and Hawaii also ranked highly in per capita spending. 

Even within states, spending is often concentrated in specific counties that contain major installations. 

In Texas, Tarrant County — home to Fort Worth — alone received more than $120 billion in defense spending from fiscal years 2020 through 2024, nearly 50% higher than the next highest amount. 

Some states often don’t come out on top, however. 

Many Pacific Northwest and Northern states, including Idaho, Oregon, Montana and Minnesota, routinely rank toward the bottom of both per capita and total military spending. 

In the 2024 fiscal year, defense spending made up just a half percent of total GDP in both Oregon and Minnesota. 

The economic impact

For many communities with military installations or manufacturing facilities, national defense is their primary industry. 

Military installations can spur hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars to flow to local economies. According to a recent report from the Texas state comptroller, defense installations in 2025 added almost $150 billion to the Texas economy and supported about 628,000 jobs. 

Many states have embraced their identity as centers of military activity. 

In a 2023 op-ed in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., wrote that a strong defense industry and reliable state economy “come as a package deal.” 

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said on July 10 that military installations each provide “tremendous value” to communities across his state. 

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., despite voting against the defense policy bill in committee due to its overall size, said provisions of the bill that would support the state’s defense manufacturers and installations enhance “Connecticut’s vital role as an arsenal of democracy.” 

But some experts say the economic benefits can often be overstated. 

Julia Gledhill, an analyst at the Stimson Center, a nonprofit think tank that studies global peace and international security issues, said federal defense spending should not be used as a tool for economic development. 

In fiscal year 2024, according to DOD data, defense spending made up less than 2% of gross domestic product in a majority of states. Just eight states relied on defense spending for more than 5% of their GDP. 

While defense spending has a significant impact for many communities, she said, if an economic boost is the goal, there’s better places to put the money. Sectors like education or healthcare both have higher returns on investment, she added. 

“The purpose of the military is not job creation,” she said. “The purpose of military spending is not economic development.”

Instead, Gledhill said the defense budget should reflect only what is needed. 

Military readiness 

Speaking to reporters during a cabinet meeting at Camp David in July, Trump described the increasing spending as an “unprecedented investment in the United States armed forces.” 

Buying more for the sake of buying more is not necessarily going to improve the military’s overall operational readiness, Gledhil added.

“We’re spending more and more, and we’re buying more and more, and it’s actually hurting military readiness rates, in direct contrast to what we’re hearing from the likes of Secretary Hegseth,” she said, referring to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. 

She pointed to a recent report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, a federal agency watchdog, that found that the F-35 fighter jet, the Defense Department’s most expensive weapons system, has increased in sustainment costs while declining in performance. 

That report found that the F-35’s mission capable rate — which is the percentage of the time it is able to carry out an assigned mission — decreased from 67% to 44% from fiscal years 2021 to 2025. The percentage of time that it is capable of completing all assigned missions, or the full mission capable rate, similarly decreased from 38% to just 25%, according to the GAO. 

In the president’s 2027 defense budget request, the number of desired F-35s increased from 47 purchased in 2026 to 85  — a total spending increase of more than $8 billion. 

And increasing military spending at such a significant rate, without a clear reason, Gledhill said, will have an impact on the rest of the federal government, citing cuts in Republicans’ 2025 tax and spending cut law to Medicaid and nutrition programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. 

She added that, despite continually rising defense spending, veterans and military families continue to struggle and face high food insecurity. 

“I think that we can take care of people if we were a bit more judicious about the weapons that we procured,” she said. “That would actually strengthen the military.”

Reporting for this project was supported by the Dow Jones News Fund.