Nebraska vs Texas on USAspending: $1.2B against $72.7B

Computer services on a $1.2B Plains stock

Nebraska’s lead NAICS is other computer related services. That services peak sits on $1.2B against Texas’s $72.7B pharmaceutical-preparation peak. A computer-services mix is a different federal buying pattern than a drug-manufacturing mix. The packet names the peaks; it does not give dollar shares.

Nebraska files 36,000 awards. Texas files 530,634. The Plains tape is modest in rows and small in dollars. Use the Nebraska and Texas state hubs for agencies and recipients. Cite USAspending.gov.

Nebraska’s $1.2B computer-services stock on 2,005,465 residents is a Plains professional-services file; Texas’s $72.7B pharmaceutical-preparation stock on 31,290,831 residents is a manufacturing-scale file. FY2026 of $352.3M versus $21.5B does not reorder that ranking.

FY2026 does more work on the Nebraska side

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $352.3M in Nebraska and $21.5B in Texas. Nebraska’s latest-year amount is a heavy cut of $1.2B. Recency is a larger share of Nebraska’s stacked stock than Texas’s $21.5B is of $72.7B. Texas still leads the latest year by a wide dollar margin.

Treat FY2026 as a recency slice of obligations, not Treasury cash. Do not divide $352.3M or $21.5B by 36,000 or 530,634 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $175.68 and $686.1 already uses Census counts of 2,005,465 and 31,290,831.

Population versus intensity

Nebraska’s 2,005,465 residents are about 6 percent of Texas’s 31,290,831. Nebraska’s $1.2B is about 2 percent of Texas’s $72.7B. Dollars lag population, which is why $175.68 trails $686.1. Nebraska is not empty of federal actions — 36,000 awards show that — and it is not Texas-scale in dollars.

Keep those per-capita figures labeled as Census-based packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations. They are not outlays per resident. Place-of-performance for computer services can sit at a contractor while users sit elsewhere. The packet does not reallocate.

Services mix versus manufacturing mix

Other computer related services and pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing are different NAICS families. Readers should not treat Nebraska’s $1.2B as a smaller version of Texas’s $72.7B. The stacks differ in size and in lead industry. The 36,000 and 530,634 rows include many codes beyond those peaks.

Outlays are a different USAspending.gov series. This page stays on obligations: $1.2B versus $72.7B stacked, and $352.3M versus $21.5B in FY2026.

Thirty-six thousand computer-services actions on $1.2B

Nebraska’s other-computer-related-services peak on $1.2B with exactly 36,000 awards is a professional-services signature. Services task orders can fill a tape without filling a $72.7B-scale stock. Texas’s 530,634 awards on $72.7B remain the scale file, with a pharmaceutical-preparation peak. Nebraska’s $352.3M FY2026 slice is large relative to $1.2B. That recency share is the Nebraska-specific fact next to Texas’s $21.5B.

Spending per capita of $175.68 on 2,005,465 residents trails Texas’s $686.1 on 31,290,831. Nebraska is warmer than several Plains neighbors and still far cooler than Texas. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not listed. Place-of-performance for computer services can sit at a contractor while users sit elsewhere. The packet does not reallocate.

Use the Nebraska and Texas hubs for agencies and recipients. Keep 36,000 versus 530,634 labeled as all-years award counts. The comparison hub holds the $1.2B versus $72.7B tables. The computer-services label describes Nebraska’s largest slice. It does not describe Texas’s manufacturing peak or Texas’s 530,634-row mix.

Nebraska’s 36,000 awards on 2,005,465 residents under $175.68 per capita describe a services-led Plains file. Other computer related services on $1.2B is not pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing on $72.7B. FY2026 of $352.3M is large for Nebraska and small next to Texas’s $21.5B. Texas’s 530,634 awards and 31,290,831 residents stay the scale side. Obligations, not outlays.

How to read Nebraska versus Texas

Read Texas first on stacked dollars ($72.7B vs $1.2B), spending per capita ($686.1 vs $175.68), award count (530,634 vs 36,000), and FY2026 ($21.5B vs $352.3M). Read Nebraska for the computer-services peak and for a $352.3M FY2026 slice that is large relative to $1.2B.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Nebraska and Texas hubs hold agencies and recipients. Outlays are not listed.

Nebraska’s 2,005,465 residents and Texas’s 31,290,831 residents set the $175.68 versus $686.1 denominators on $1.2B versus $72.7B. Award counts of 36,000 versus 530,634 and FY2026 of $352.3M versus $21.5B complete the comparison. Other computer related services versus pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing remains the mix contrast. Cite USAspending.gov. Obligations, not outlays.

Questions

Does Nebraska or Texas have more federal spending?

Texas leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $72.7B to Nebraska’s $1.2B. Texas also leads spending per capita, $686.1 versus $175.68, on 31,290,831 residents against Nebraska’s 2,005,465. Award counts are 530,634 in Texas and 36,000 in Nebraska. FY2026 obligations are $21.5B in Texas and $352.3M in Nebraska.

Is Nebraska’s FY2026 figure large relative to its stock?

Nebraska’s FY2026 obligations are $352.3M on a $1.2B stacked stock. Texas’s FY2026 obligations are $21.5B on $72.7B. Recency still ranks Texas first. Nebraska’s latest-year slice is a sizable share of its own stock. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in Nebraska and Texas?

Nebraska’s top industry is other computer related services. Texas’s is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $1.2B and $72.7B. Award counts are 36,000 in Nebraska and 530,634 in Texas. Those peaks are mix labels on the stacked stocks, not inventories of every award.

Are Nebraska vs Texas figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $1.2B and $72.7B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $352.3M and $21.5B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($175.68 vs $686.1) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.