U.S. Air Force / Wikimedia Commons
Why It Matters
President Trump’s request for a massive $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget could deepen economic disparities across America, with defense spending continuing to flow heavily toward a handful of states while others struggle to attract federal military investment. For states like Idaho, Oregon, and Montana that receive minimal defense funding, the expansion represents a missed opportunity for economic development and job creation.
What Happened
Trump has asked Congress to approve $1.5 trillion in total Pentagon spending, representing a 42% increase over the previous year. The House and Senate are currently considering competing versions of the National Defense Authorization Act, with both chambers proposing $1.15 trillion in total base spending for the military.
The proposed spending surge would amplify an existing geographic imbalance in how the federal government distributes defense dollars. From fiscal years 2020 through 2024, three states—Texas, California, and Virginia—consistently dominated Pentagon spending, each receiving roughly $50 billion or more annually. These three states regularly account for 10% or more of total Pentagon spending.
The disparity becomes even sharper when measured per resident. Virginia and Connecticut ranked highest in per-capita defense spending in both 2020 and 2024, while Maryland, Alaska, and Hawaii also received substantial military funding relative to population. In contrast, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and Minnesota ranked toward the bottom in both per-capita and total military spending.
By the Numbers
- Texas’s Tarrant County alone received more than $120 billion in defense spending between fiscal years 2020 and 2024—nearly 50% more than the next highest county.
- Defense installations in Texas contributed almost $150 billion to the state economy in 2025 and supported approximately 628,000 jobs.
- Defense spending comprised just 0.5% of gross domestic product in Oregon and Minnesota in fiscal year 2024, compared to more than 5% in eight states.
- In the majority of U.S. states, defense spending represented less than 2% of GDP in 2024.
- Trump’s requested increase would push total Pentagon spending from previous levels to $1.5 trillion—a 42% jump year-over-year.
The Geographic Winners and Losers
States with established defense infrastructure and military installations benefit disproportionately from federal spending. Texas exemplifies this advantage: the state’s defense sector generates substantial economic activity and employment far beyond direct military payroll. A single Texas county has received more cumulative defense dollars than entire regions of other states.
Meanwhile, states in the Pacific Northwest and upper Midwest see minimal Pentagon investment. This creates a self-reinforcing cycle: states with existing military presence attract more facilities and contracts, while states without that foothold struggle to break in. Idaho’s defense sector presence remains marginal compared to defense-heavy states, meaning the state’s workforce, infrastructure, and economy receive minimal benefit from federal military spending.
What Experts Are Saying
The spending concentration raises questions about federal priorities. According to reporting on the matter, some analysts argue that “federal defense spending should not be used as a tool for economic development,” suggesting the Pentagon’s allocation decisions should prioritize military readiness over regional economic benefit, as first reported by the Idaho Capital Sun. Others counter that concentrating expertise and infrastructure in proven defense hubs enhances national security effectiveness.
Advocates for military investment in their regions emphasize the local benefits. “National security starts at home,” one defense sector representative noted. “You need these communities to be this innovation hub.”
What Comes Next
Congress will deliberate over the House and Senate versions of the National Defense Authorization Act in coming months. The final compromise bill will determine whether Trump’s $1.5 trillion request moves forward or receives modification. States already receiving substantial defense funding are likely to continue benefiting, while states with minimal Pentagon presence face an uphill battle to shift the spending distribution.
The outcome will shape defense-sector employment, regional economic growth, and federal spending priorities for years to come. For states like Idaho seeking to expand their military-industrial footprint, the current budget process offers limited opportunity to alter longstanding Pentagon spending patterns.
About the Author
