Does Mississippi or New Hampshire have more federal spending?

Mississippi leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $2.88B to New Hampshire’s $2.48B. New Hampshire leads spending per capita, $284.15 versus $115.31, on 1,409,032 residents against Mississippi’s 2,943,045. Mississippi has more awards (233,003 vs 9,224). FY2026 obligations are $339.4M in Mississippi and $400.4M in New Hampshire.

Why does Mississippi have so many more awards than New Hampshire?

The packet reports 233,003 awards in Mississippi and 9,224 in New Hampshire. Stacked stocks are $2.88B versus $2.48B. Population is 2,943,045 versus 1,409,032. Award count is a row total, not average size. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in Mississippi and New Hampshire?

Mississippi’s top industry is ship building and repairing. New Hampshire’s is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $2.88B and $2.48B. Award counts are 233,003 in Mississippi and 9,224 in New Hampshire.

Are Mississippi vs New Hampshire figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $2.88B and $2.48B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $339.4M and $400.4M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($115.31 vs $284.15) uses Census population where present.

← All guides

Mississippi vs New Hampshire on USAspending: $2.88B vs $2.48B

Mississippi’s USAspending.gov obligation stock is $2.88B; New Hampshire’s is $2.48B. Mississippi has more people—2,943,045 versus 1,409,032—and a much larger award file: 233,003 actions against 9,224. New Hampshire’s spending per capita is $284.15 versus Mississippi’s $115.31. FY2026 obligations are $339.4M in Mississippi and $400.4M in New Hampshire. Ship building and repairing leads Mississippi; small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing lead New Hampshire. These totals are obligations, not outlays.

Key figures

Mississippi $2.88B vs New Hampshire $2.48B in stacked USAspending obligations.
New Hampshire per capita $284.15 vs Mississippi $115.31 on 1,409,032 vs 2,943,045 residents.
Awards: 233,003 vs 9,224; FY2026 $339.4M vs $400.4M.
Top industries: ship building in Mississippi; small arms and ordnance in New Hampshire.
Figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays.

Twenty-five times the awards on a modestly larger stock

Mississippi’s 233,003 awards against New Hampshire’s 9,224 is the row gap that defines this pair. Dollars are closer: $2.88B versus $2.48B. New Hampshire’s sparse file still sits on a $2.48B stock and a $284.15 per-capita reading on 1,409,032 residents.

Mississippi’s 2,943,045 residents produce $115.31 per capita on $2.88B. Intensity favors New Hampshire. Volume favors Mississippi.

FY2026 favors New Hampshire on recency: $400.4M versus $339.4M. Cite USAspending.gov for the stacked stocks and the latest-year amounts.

Mississippi’s 233,003 awards versus New Hampshire’s 9,224 is the extreme row gap in this batch. Stocks of $2.88B versus $2.48B are closer. Intensity of $115.31 versus $284.15 runs opposite. FY2026 of $339.4M versus $400.4M favors New Hampshire on recency. All dollar cuts are USAspending.gov obligations.

Ship building and repairing versus small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing is mix. Census counts of 2,943,045 and 1,409,032 already sit in the packet. Outlays are not listed. Do not invent average award size.

Ship building versus small arms and ordnance

Mississippi’s lead NAICS is ship building and repairing. New Hampshire’s lead NAICS is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing. Those peaks sit on $2.88B and $2.48B. Shipyards are a first read on Mississippi’s mix; ordnance is a first read on New Hampshire’s mix.

The 233,003 Mississippi awards and 9,224 New Hampshire awards include many actions outside those labels. Use the Mississippi and New Hampshire state hubs for agencies and recipients. Both peaks are USAspending.gov obligation mixes.

FY2026: $339.4M versus $400.4M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $339.4M in Mississippi and $400.4M in New Hampshire. Recency does not preserve Mississippi’s stacked dollar lead. Treat the year as a recency slice of obligations, not as Treasury cash.

Do not divide $339.4M or $400.4M by 233,003 or 9,224 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $115.31 and $284.15 already sits beside Census counts of 2,943,045 and 1,409,032.

A 233,003-award Gulf file against 9,224 New England actions

Mississippi’s award file is twenty-five times New Hampshire’s on stocks that are closer: $2.88B versus $2.48B. Intensity runs opposite: $115.31 versus $284.15 on Census counts of 2,943,045 and 1,409,032. All dollar cuts are USAspending.gov obligations.

Ship building and repairing leads Mississippi. Small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing lead New Hampshire. FY2026 of $339.4M versus $400.4M favors New Hampshire on recency.

Outlays are not in the packet. Do not invent average award size. Cite rows as rows and stocks as stocks.

Shipyards versus ordnance on the same series

Peak NAICS describes mix. It does not create a second dollar total. Cite $2.88B and $2.48B as stacked USAspending.gov obligations and $339.4M and $400.4M as FY2026 slices.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Mississippi and New Hampshire hubs hold agencies and recipients. Keep $115.31 and $284.15 labeled as Census-based obligation ratios, not outlays per resident.

How to read Mississippi versus New Hampshire

Read Mississippi first on stacked dollars ($2.88B vs $2.48B), population (2,943,045 vs 1,409,032), and awards (233,003 vs 9,224). Read New Hampshire first on spending per capita ($284.15 vs $115.31) and FY2026 ($400.4M vs $339.4M). Note ship building versus small arms and ordnance.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Mississippi and New Hampshire hubs hold agencies and recipients. Outlays are a different series. Keep per-capita figures labeled as Census-based packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations.

Mississippi’s 233,003 awards versus New Hampshire’s 9,224 remain the row extreme. New Hampshire’s $284.15 per capita and $400.4M FY2026 slice remain the intensity and recency leads. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not in the packet.

Questions

Does Mississippi or New Hampshire have more federal spending?: Mississippi leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $2.88B to New Hampshire’s $2.48B. New Hampshire leads spending per capita, $284.15 versus $115.31, on 1,409,032 residents against Mississippi’s 2,943,045. Mississippi has more awards (233,003 vs 9,224). FY2026 obligations are $339.4M in Mississippi and $400.4M in New Hampshire.
Why does Mississippi have so many more awards than New Hampshire?: The packet reports 233,003 awards in Mississippi and 9,224 in New Hampshire. Stacked stocks are $2.88B versus $2.48B. Population is 2,943,045 versus 1,409,032. Award count is a row total, not average size. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.
What industries lead in Mississippi and New Hampshire?: Mississippi’s top industry is ship building and repairing. New Hampshire’s is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $2.88B and $2.48B. Award counts are 233,003 in Mississippi and 9,224 in New Hampshire.
Are Mississippi vs New Hampshire figures Treasury outlays?: No. The $2.88B and $2.48B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $339.4M and $400.4M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($115.31 vs $284.15) uses Census population where present.

State comparison from SpendingVault aggregates of USAspending obligations. Per-capita uses Census population where present.