Oregon vs Virginia on USAspending: forestry-led $2.7B vs $110.8B

Pacific Northwest dollars vs National Capital dollars

These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays. Oregon’s $2.7B is about 2 percent of Virginia’s $110.8B. Award counts are 36,965 in Oregon and 1,116,647 in Virginia. Oregon’s federal-award file is real and relatively thin.

Population (4,272,371 vs 8,811,195) is about a 2-to-1 ratio. Obligations are not. Anyone expecting Oregon’s tech and timber economy to look like Virginia’s contractor economy on this table will not find that result in $2.7B versus $110.8B.

Fifty-six dollars per person vs $1,344

Oregon’s $56.06 per capita is the low intensity marker in this pair. Virginia’s $1,344.24 is the high one. Dividing $2.7B by 4,272,371 residents and $110.8B by 8,811,195 residents leaves a gap that population cannot close.

Low per-capita obligations are not a measure of state prosperity. They measure federal award commitments booked to the state in this aggregate. Oregon can have a large private sector and still show $56.06 on this column.

Oregon’s $56.06 per capita is the intensity marker in this pair. It uses $2.7B and 4,272,371 residents. Virginia’s $1,344.24 uses $110.8B and 8,811,195 residents. Support activities for forestry as Oregon’s top industry on 36,965 awards is a land-management mix, not a professional-services mix. FY2026’s $239.5M versus $11.8B can move with fire-year schedules on the Oregon side without changing the stacked order. A thin row file and a low per-capita rate can coexist with a real private economy that simply does not book as USAspending.gov place-of-performance obligations at Virginia scale. Outlays remain a separate cash concept.

Support activities for forestry vs computer services

Oregon’s top industry is support activities for forestry. Virginia’s is other computer related services. Federal forestry support can include fire, thinning, reforestation, and related field work. Virginia’s lead slice is computer-related professional services.

Those labels are a land-management versus desk-services contrast. They sit on 36,965 Oregon awards and 1,116,647 Virginia awards, and on $2.7B versus $110.8B. Mix explains part of the texture; it does not by itself produce the full dollar gap.

FY2026: $239.5M vs $11.8B

FY2026 obligations are $239.5M in Oregon and $11.8B in Virginia. Oregon’s latest year is a modest slice of $2.7B; Virginia’s $11.8B is one year of $110.8B. Seasonal forestry work can bunch in particular years, which is another reason to keep FY2026 and the stacked total in separate questions. Both remain obligations.

Oregon’s $239.5M in FY2026 is recency inside $2.7B and can move with fire-year and land-management schedules. Virginia’s $11.8B inside $110.8B sits on a services calendar that does not follow the same seasonal pulse. Do not divide $239.5M by Oregon’s 36,965 all-years awards. Per capita of $56.06 on 4,272,371 residents versus $1,344.24 on 8,811,195 residents is the intensity comparison. Both the latest-year and stacked columns are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays.

What a forestry-vs-IT table cannot settle

This comparison does not value timber policy or IT programs. It reports $2.7B vs $110.8B in obligations from USAspending.gov. Outlays can follow later. Open the Oregon and Virginia state pages for agencies and recipients. Forestry-support awards can bunch in fire years and thin in others. That seasonality is a reason to keep Oregon’s $2.7B stack and $239.5M FY2026 cut in separate questions. Virginia’s $110.8B and $11.8B FY2026 sit on a different industrial calendar.

Forestry support is Oregon’s largest slice of $2.7B, not a claim that Oregon’s federal file is only woods work. Virginia’s other computer related services slice of $110.8B is not a claim that Virginia’s file is only IT. Award counts of 36,965 versus 1,116,647 show a thin Oregon row file. Use the Oregon and Virginia state hubs for agencies and recipients, and keep outlays in a separate mental column.

How to use Oregon’s forestry label without over-reading it

Support activities for forestry is the largest slice of Oregon’s $2.7B, not the whole file. Other computer related services is the largest slice of Virginia’s $110.8B, not the whole file. Per capita of $56.06 versus $1,344.24 on 4,272,371 and 8,811,195 residents is the intensity comparison. Award counts of 36,965 versus 1,116,647 show a thin Oregon row file.

FY2026 ($239.5M vs $11.8B) answers recency. Stacked totals answer scale. USAspending.gov obligations are not Treasury outlays and are not a valuation of timber policy. Open the Oregon and Virginia hubs for agencies and recipients.

Questions

How do Oregon and Virginia compare on USAspending?

Oregon has $2.7B in obligations and 36,965 awards; Virginia has $110.8B and 1,116,647 awards. Spending per capita is $56.06 versus $1,344.24 on Census populations of 4,272,371 and 8,811,195. FY2026 obligations are $239.5M and $11.8B. Figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.

What is Oregon’s top federal contracting industry vs Virginia’s?

Oregon’s top industry is support activities for forestry. Virginia’s is other computer related services. Those slices sit on $2.7B and $110.8B in obligations. Forestry support and computer services are different federal customers; the labels mark the largest grouping in each file. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.

Why is Oregon’s per-capita federal spending so much lower than Virginia’s?

Oregon’s $56.06 per capita uses $2.7B in obligations and 4,272,371 residents. Virginia’s $1,344.24 uses $110.8B and 8,811,195 residents. Population differs by about 2-to-1; obligations differ by much more. Per capita records the intensity gap after headcount is removed. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.

Are Oregon vs Virginia figures Treasury outlays?

No. They are obligations from USAspending.gov. Outlays are cash payments that can lag, including on multi-year land-management awards. The $2.7B and $110.8B totals and FY2026 amounts of $239.5M and $11.8B are commitment figures, not checks already issued by Treasury. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.