California vs New Mexico on USAspending: $39.5B against $3.9B

The $945.82 reading is the New Mexico fact

New Mexico’s 2,130,256 residents are about 5 percent of California’s 39,431,263. New Mexico’s $3.9B is about 10 percent of California’s $39.5B. That mismatch, on a small Census denominator, is the $945.82 versus $135.64 inversion. New Mexico is a small-population file with a heavy obligation load per resident. California is a large-population file with a cooler load per resident and a much larger stock.

New Mexico files only 19,233 awards against California’s 639,340. The $3.9B is concentrated in few actions. The packet does not publish average award size. The row contrast is enough to flag concentration next to the per-capita outlier.

FY2026 of $2.0B on a $3.9B stock

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $5.3B in California and $2.0B in New Mexico. New Mexico’s latest-year amount is about half of $3.9B. Recency is doing more work on the New Mexico side than in almost any other California pairing in this slice. California’s $5.3B is a smaller share of $39.5B and remains the larger latest-year figure.

Treat FY2026 as a recency slice of obligations, not Treasury cash. Do not divide $5.3B or $2.0B by 639,340 or 19,233 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $135.64 and $945.82 already uses Census denominators of 39,431,263 and 2,130,256.

Shared construction peaks on different intensities

Both states list commercial and institutional building construction as the lead NAICS. A shared label does not explain $945.82 versus $135.64. It means the largest slice in each mix is federal building work, sitting on $3.9B in New Mexico and $39.5B in California, with 19,233 awards versus 639,340.

Use the California and New Mexico state hubs for agencies and recipients. Cite USAspending.gov. Construction awards can be lumpy. The packet does not split labs, bases, or office projects. Do not treat the shared peak as an outlay category.

What $945.82 does and does not mean

New Mexico’s $945.82 is stacked USAspending.gov obligations divided by Census population where present. It is not cash paid per resident and not a claim about who received the money. Place-of-performance can sit at a federal campus while recipients are headquartered elsewhere. The packet does not reallocate.

California still books $39.5B against $3.9B. Scale remains California’s. Intensity, concentration (19,233 awards), and FY2026 share ($2.0B of $3.9B) are New Mexico’s. Outlays are a different series.

A $2.0B latest year on a $3.9B New Mexico stock

New Mexico’s FY2026 obligations of $2.0B on a $3.9B stacked stock are the recency fact that matches the $945.82 per-capita outlier. About half the New Mexico aggregate sits in the latest year in this packet. California’s $5.3B FY2026 on $39.5B is a smaller share of a much larger stock. Both states peak in commercial and institutional building construction. The shared label does not explain $945.82 versus $135.64 or 19,233 awards versus 639,340.

New Mexico’s 2,130,256 residents are a small Census denominator under a $3.9B construction-led stock. California’s 39,431,263 residents sit under $39.5B. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not listed. Do not divide $2.0B by 19,233 all-years awards. The $945.82 and $135.64 readings already use Census denominators against the stacked stocks.

Place-of-performance for construction can sit at a federal campus, lab, or job site. The packet does not reallocate recipient headquarters. Use the California and New Mexico hubs for agencies and recipients. The comparison hub holds the $39.5B versus $3.9B tables. Keep the shared construction peak as a mix tag. Scale is California’s. Intensity, concentration, and FY2026 share are New Mexico’s.

New Mexico’s 19,233 awards on 2,130,256 residents under $945.82 per capita describe the intensity outlier in this California slice, with FY2026 of $2.0B on a $3.9B stock. California’s $39.5B, 639,340 awards, and $135.64 on 39,431,263 residents remain the scale side. Shared commercial construction is a mix tag, not a matched ratio. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not listed.

How to read California versus New Mexico

Read California first on stacked dollars ($39.5B vs $3.9B) and award count (639,340 vs 19,233). Read New Mexico first on spending per capita ($945.82 vs $135.64) and on a $2.0B FY2026 slice against California’s $5.3B. Note the shared commercial-construction peak on two very different intensities.

The comparison hub holds the tables. Outlays are not listed.

Questions

Does California or New Mexico have more federal spending?

California leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $39.5B to New Mexico’s $3.9B. New Mexico leads spending per capita, $945.82 versus $135.64, on 2,130,256 residents against California’s 39,431,263. Award counts are 639,340 in California and 19,233 in New Mexico. FY2026 obligations are $5.3B in California and $2.0B in New Mexico.

Why is New Mexico’s per-capita figure so high?

The packet reports $945.82 per capita in New Mexico on 2,130,256 residents and $135.64 in California on 39,431,263. New Mexico’s $3.9B stock is small in dollars but heavy relative to its Census count, and FY2026 is $2.0B of that stock. Award counts are 19,233 versus 639,340. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

Do California and New Mexico have the same lead industry?

Yes. Both peak in commercial and institutional building construction. Those labels sit on $39.5B in California and $3.9B in New Mexico. Award counts are 639,340 versus 19,233. A shared peak is a mix tag, not evidence that intensity matches. The packet lists USAspending.gov obligations only.

Are California vs New Mexico figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $39.5B and $3.9B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $5.3B and $2.0B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($135.64 vs $945.82) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.