DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING A STATE-BY-STATE ANALYSIS

Similar documents
PERMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING IN THE UNITED STATES. Member Electronic Vote/ . Alabama No No Yes No. Alaska No No No No

Matthew Miller, Bureau of Legislative Research

2016 Voter Registration Deadlines by State

INSTITUTE of PUBLIC POLICY

2015 ANNUAL OUTCOME GOAL PLAN (WITH FY 2014 OUTCOMES) Prepared in compliance with Government Performance and Results Act

ACCESS TO STATE GOVERNMENT 1. Web Pages for State Laws, State Rules and State Departments of Health

Case 3:15-md CRB Document 4700 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 5

Campaign Finance E-Filing Systems by State WHAT IS REQUIRED? WHO MUST E-FILE? Candidates (Annually, Monthly, Weekly, Daily).

MEMORANDUM JUDGES SERVING AS ARBITRATORS AND MEDIATORS

We re Paying Dearly for Bush s Tax Cuts Study Shows Burdens by State from Bush s $87-Billion-Every-51-Days Borrowing Binge

For jurisdictions that reject for punctuation errors, is the rejection based on a policy decision or due to statutory provisions?

Notice N HCFB-1. March 25, Subject: FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROGRAM OBLIGATION AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR (FY) Classification Code

12B,C: Voting Power and Apportionment

The remaining legislative bodies have guides that help determine bill assignments. Table shows the criteria used to refer bills.

The Economic Impact of Spending for Operations and Construction in 2014 by AZA-Accredited Zoos and Aquariums

Delegates: Understanding the numbers and the rules

State Trial Courts with Incidental Appellate Jurisdiction, 2010

Federal Rate of Return. FY 2019 Update Texas Department of Transportation - Federal Affairs

WYOMING POPULATION DECLINED SLIGHTLY

National State Law Survey: Statute of Limitations 1

2008 Changes to the Constitution of International Union UNITED STEELWORKERS

Map of the Foreign Born Population of the United States, 1900

Rhoads Online State Appointment Rules Handy Guide

STATE LAWS SUMMARY: CHILD LABOR CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS BY STATE

THE PROCESS TO RENEW A JUDGMENT SHOULD BEGIN 6-8 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE

NOTICE TO MEMBERS No January 2, 2018

If you have questions, please or call

The Economic Impact of Spending for Operations and Construction by AZA-Accredited Zoos and Aquariums

ACTION: Notice announcing addresses for summons and complaints. SUMMARY: Our Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is responsible for processing

Immigration Policy Brief August 2006

State Complaint Information

Bylaws of the. Student Membership

New Census Estimates Show Slight Changes For Congressional Apportionment Now, But Point to Larger Changes by 2020

Decision Analyst Economic Index United States Census Divisions April 2017

Should Politicians Choose Their Voters? League of Women Voters of MI Education Fund

American Government. Workbook

The Victim Rights Law Center thanks Catherine Cambridge for her research assistance.

New Population Estimates Show Slight Changes For 2010 Congressional Apportionment, With A Number of States Sitting Close to the Edge

Election of Worksheet #1 - Candidates and Parties. Abraham Lincoln. Stephen A. Douglas. John C. Breckinridge. John Bell

More State s Apportionment Allocations Impacted by New Census Estimates; New Twist in Supreme Court Case

Components of Population Change by State

7-45. Electronic Access to Legislative Documents. Legislative Documents

2016 us election results

Women in Federal and State-level Judgeships

Chapter 12: The Math of Democracy 12B,C: Voting Power and Apportionment - SOLUTIONS

ADVANCEMENT, JURISDICTION-BY-JURISDICTION

PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS POLICY. Table of Contents Page

State-by-State Chart of HIV-Specific Laws and Prosecutorial Tools

TELEPHONE; STATISTICAL INFORMATION; PRISONS AND PRISONERS; LITIGATION; CORRECTIONS; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION ISSUES

Committee Consideration of Bills

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS. OUT-OF- STATE DONORS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

National Latino Peace Officers Association

December 30, 2008 Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote

UNIFORM NOTICE OF REGULATION A TIER 2 OFFERING Pursuant to Section 18(b)(3), (b)(4), and/or (c)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933

Soybean Promotion and Research: Amend the Order to Adjust Representation on the United Soybean Board

Background Information on Redistricting

VOLUME 36 ISSUE 1 JANUARY 2018

2018 Constituent Society Delegate Apportionment

2010 CENSUS POPULATION REAPPORTIONMENT DATA

The Electoral College And

Apportionment. Seven Roads to Fairness. NCTM Regional Conference. November 13, 2014 Richmond, VA. William L. Bowdish

Registered Agents. Question by: Kristyne Tanaka. Date: 27 October 2010

28 USC 152. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

STATE OF ENERGY REPORT. An in-depth industry analysis by the Texas Independent Producers & Royalty Owners Association

Limitations on Contributions to Political Committees

2008 Electoral Vote Preliminary Preview

Gender, Race, and Dissensus in State Supreme Courts

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION [NOTICE ] Price Index Adjustments for Contribution and Expenditure Limitations and

America s Deficient Bridges: A State-by-State Comparison

Intake 1 Total Requests Received 4

Democratic Convention *Saturday 1 March 2008 *Monday 25 August - Thursday 28 August District of Columbia Non-binding Primary

Appendix 6 Right of Publicity

Oklahoma, Maine, Migration and Right to Work : A Confused and Misleading Analysis. By the Bureau of Labor Education, University of Maine (Spring 2012)

Date: October 14, 2014

Intake 1 Total Requests Received 4

NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY Legislative Services Office

Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2010 Session

Survey of State Laws on Credit Unions Incidental Powers

CIRCLE The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement. State Voter Registration and Election Day Laws

Floor Amendment Procedures

Fiscal Year (September 30, 2018) Requests by Intake and Case Status Intake 1 Case Review 6 Period

Campaign Finance Options: Public Financing and Contribution Limits

Election Year Restrictions on Mass Mailings by Members of Congress: How H.R Would Change Current Law

Red, white, and blue. One for each state. Question 1 What are the colors of our flag? Question 2 What do the stars on the flag mean?

Elder Financial Abuse and State Mandatory Reporting Laws for Financial Institutions Prepared by CUNA s State Government Affairs

The Impact of Ebbing Immigration in Los Angeles: New Insights from an Established Gateway

America is facing an epidemic of the working hungry. Hunger Free America s analysis of federal data has determined:

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction. Identifying the Importance of ID. Overview. Policy Recommendations. Conclusion. Summary of Findings

Page 1 of 5. Appendix A.

Overview. Strategic Imperatives. Our Organization. Finance and Budget. Path to Victory

Beyond cities: How Airbnb supports rural America s revitalization

Department of Justice

TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY THURGOOD MARSHALL SCHOOL OF LAW LIBRARY LOCATION GUIDE July 2018

Class Actions and the Refund of Unconstitutional Taxes. Revenue Laws Study Committee Trina Griffin, Research Division April 2, 2008

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Franklin D. Roosevelt. Pertaining to the. Campaign of 1928

Alabama 2.5 months 2.5 months N/R N/R 3.5 months 3.5 months 3.5 months 3.5 months No No

ARTICLE I ESTABLISHMENT NAME

Incarcerated America Human Rights Watch Backgrounder April 2003

Race to the White House Drive to the 2016 Republican Nomination. Ron Nehring California Chairman, Ted Cruz for President

Transcription:

Bloomberg Government Study: DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING A STATE-BY-STATE ANALYSIS

THE FUTURE OF INFLUENCE Delivering news, analytics and data-driven decision tools, Bloomberg Government s digital workspace gives an intelligent edge to government affairs, federal and contracting professionals influencing government action.

November, 2015 A STATE-BY-STATE ANALYSIS BY KEVIN BRANCATO kbrancato@bloomberg.net Director of Government Contracts Research ROBERT LEVINSON rlevinson5@bloomberg.net Senior Defense Analyst CAMERON LEUTHY cleuthy2@bloomberg.net Senior Budget Analyst PAUL MURPHY pmurphy50@bloomberg.net Senior Data Analyst JODIE MORRIS Editor CONTENTS Introduction 3 Executive Summary 5 Alabama 12 Alaska 13 Arizona 14 Arkansas 15 California 16 Colorado 17 Connecticut 18 Delaware 19 District of Columbia 20 Florida 21 Georgia 22 Hawaii 23 Idaho 24 Illinois 25 Indiana 26 Iowa 27 Kansas 28 Kentucky 29 Louisiana 30 Maine 31 Maryland 32 Massachusetts 33 Michigan 34 Minnesota 35 Mississippi 36 Missouri 37 Montana 38 Nebraska 39 Nevada 40 New Hampshire 41 New Jersey 42 New Mexico 43 New York 44 North Carolina 45 North Dakota 46 Ohio 47 Oklahoma 48 Oregon 49 Pennsylvania 50 Rhode Island 51 South Carolina 52 South Dakota 53 Tennessee 54 Texas 55 Utah 56 Vermont 57 Virginia 58 Washington 59 West Virginia 60 Wisconsin 61 Wyoming 62 About the authors 63 Bloomberg Government 64 Notes 66 3

ALL SPENDING IS LOCAL

Introduction In the world of government spending, decisions made in Washington never stay in Washington. What Congress decides one year has lasting reverberations crisscrossing the country, with impact at the state, local and individual level. Whether you work in Congress, lobby on behalf of industry or work at a business supplying the military, these decisions matter to you. And they matter to us too. Bloomberg Government s job is to help you influence government outcomes. To maximize your opportunities, to help you understand the implications of decisions and to provide the data-driven tools you need to proactively gain an edge. In the following pages, Bloomberg Government brings you detailed analysis of defense contract spending across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Defense spending, despite a period of constrained budgets, remains crucial to thousands of soldiers in the field and millions of jobs across the country. Inside you will see each state s overall defense spending ranking, top defense contractors, largest military bases and historic contract spending. This work is part of Bloomberg Government s commitment to: Empower you to find information faster to separate signal from noise Bring you new business opportunities so you can act, empowered by an intelligent edge Enhance the way you work to provide a service that helps you work faster and smarter Bloomberg Government s detailed state-by-state analysis is designed to strip away the abstraction that accompanies budget conversations and pull up the grassroots impact. Here, you will see down to the district where spending has occurred. Keep it as a guidebook for your decisions in the year ahead and as a roadmap for how national decisions manifest at the local level. Learn more about us at bgov.com. 5

Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Defense contract spending varies enormously by state. 1 In fiscal 2014, 2 the Defense Department spent $266 billion on unclassified defense contracts in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. 3 The five highest-ranking states, Virginia, California, Texas, Maryland and Connecticut, have both major defense industrial centers and large military bases. Yet the impact of defense spending also depends on a state s size and its economic diversification. In Virginia, the state with the most defense contract spending in fiscal 2014, defense contract spending was about 7.6 percent of the state s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). California was second in defense contract spending at $31.6 billion, yet defense contracting accounts for only 1.4 percent of its economy. That ratio means California s $2.3 trillion economy would be far more resilient in the face of planned reductions in defense spending and less responsive to increases. Since the passage of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which reduced and capped defense spending, each year the president and Congress have struggled to find ways to spend more on their priorities, including defense. Every year, they have increased the spending caps, and the Pentagon s budget, by billions of dollars, yet budgets remain flat, receiving tens of billions of dollars less than requested. 1 For this study, defense contract spending is defined as money obligated to contracts by the Defense Department, as reported to the Federal Procurement Data System. The data are cleaned by Bloomberg and put into a proprietary contracts database accessible through tools on bgov.com. 2 The federal fiscal year 2014 ran from Oct. 1, 2013, through Sept. 30, 2014. 3 Figures don t include defense contract dollars spent outside the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Chart 1: Ranking of Total Defense Contract Spending by State (in billions) Rank State Defense contract spending 1 Virginia $35.2 2 California $31.6 3 Texas $24.1 4 Maryland $13.7 5 Connecticut $13.2 6 Pennsylvania $10.3 7 Florida $10.0 8 Massachusetts $9.4 9 Alabama $8.8 10 Arizona $8.7 In fiscal 2014, defense spending in the top five states accounted for $117.9 billion, or 44 percent of the $266 billion in defense contract spending in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The top 25 states accounted for almost 90 percent of all defense contracting. Yet those states are geographically diverse, stretching across the entire country. 6 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

Executive Summary Chart 1: Ranking of Total Defense Contract Spending by State (in billions) The Washington, D.C., metro area, including Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, is one locus of defense spending. Fiscal 2014 defense contract spending in the District itself was $4.3 billion, or 1.6 percent of all fiscal 2014 defense contract spending. Table 2: Top 10 States by Defense Contract Spending as a Percentage of GDP Rank State Percentage of state GDP 1 Virginia 7.6% 2 Connecticut 5.2% 3 Alabama 4.4% 4 Maryland 3.9% 5 District of Columbia 3.8% 6 Kentucky 3.3% 7 Arizona 3.1% 8 Hawaii 2.9% 9 Alaska 2.6% 10 Missouri 2.6% Just as defense contract spending is distributed unevenly nationwide, it is also unevenly distributed within states, with some congressional districts receiving far more defense dollars than others. Not surprisingly, three of the top 10 congressional districts are in Virginia. 7

Executive Summary Chart 2: Ranking of Defense Contract Spending as a Share of State GDP Virginia s 8th congressional district, represented by Democrat Don Beyer, garnered a whopping $9.6 billion in defense contract dollars in fiscal 2014. That makes VA-8, which includes the Pentagon, the top defense contracting district in the country. Hewlett-Packard Co. was the top defense vendor in the 8th district, with more than half a billion dollars in contracted work in in fiscal 2014. In the state maps that follow, not all congressional districts are labeled when districts are small and close together. Table 3: Ranking by Defense Contract Spending by Congressional District (Dollars in billions) Rank District Defense contracting 1 VA-08 $9.6 2 VA-11 $8.0 3 CT-02 $7.1 4 TX-12 $6.7 5 Al-05 $6.1 6 VA-03 $6.0 7 MO-01 $5.8 8 MD-02 $5.3 9 WA-09 $5.2 10 CA-17 $4.4 8 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

Executive Summary This Bloomberg Government study updates a report released on Nov. 17, 2011. That report looked at all defense spending contracting and spending on military and civilian personnel for fiscal 2009. Unfortunately, the Department of Defense no longer releases payroll information broken out by state. The current study examines only defense contract spending in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The figures come from Bloomberg Government s proprietary contracts database. They are consistent with the BGOV200 list of top contractors for fiscal 2014. 1 The location of the spending is based upon place of performance as reported to the U.S. government. For goods, the place of performance is where the good is produced. For services, the place of performance is where the service is performed. The figures for state population and state GDP come from the U.S. Census Bureau. The figures on personnel for the top military installations in each state come from the Department of Defense s 2015 Base Structure Report. Bloomberg has corrected the names of the bases where appropriate. 1 The BGOV200 shows spending by contracting agency. This study shows spending by funding agency. The differences occur when an agency (the funding agency) uses another agency s contract (the contracting agency) to make purchases. 9

APPENDIX Appendix 1: States Ranked by defense Contracting as a percentage of their GDP Appendix 2: Dollar amounts of Contract defense spending in each state (Dollars in billions) Rank State Percentage of state GDP 1 Virginia 7.59% 2 Connecticut 5.23% 3 Alabama 4.41% 4 Maryland 3.93% 5 District of Columbia 3.76% 6 Kentucky 3.29% 7 Arizona 3.05% 8 Hawaii 2.87% 9 Alaska 2.65% 10 Missouri 2.57% 11 Maine 2.56% 12 New Mexico 2.43% 13 Mississippi 2.19% 14 Massachusetts 2.05% 15 Colorado 1.91% 16 Washington 1.78% 17 South Carolina 1.73% 18 New Hampshire 1.65% 19 Pennsylvania 1.55% 20 Rhode Island 1.50% 21 Texas 1.47% 22 California 1.37% 23 Georgia 1.36% 24 Minnesota 1.22% 25 Florida 1.19% 26 Utah 1.13% 27 Kansas 1.07% 28 Nevada 1.01% 29 Oklahoma 1.01% 30 New Jersey 0.99% 31 Louisiana 0.84% 32 Ohio 0.81% 33 Indiana 0.78% 34 South Dakota 0.76% 35 Iowa 0.66% 36 Delaware 0.65% 37 Illinois 0.59% 38 Nebraska 0.58% 39 Michigan 0.55% 40 North Carolina 0.53% 41 Vermont 0.51% 42 Arkansas 0.50% 43 Tennessee 0.45% 44 New York 0.45% 45 Montana 0.45% 46 Wisconsin 0.44% 47 North Dakota 0.41% 48 Oregon 0.27% 49 Idaho 0.26% 50 West Virginia 0.26% 51 Wyoming 0.21% Rank State Defense spending in state 1 Virginia $35.2 2 California $31.6 3 Texas $24.1 4 Maryland $13.7 5 Connecticut $13.2 6 Pennsylvania $10.3 7 Florida $10.0 8 Massachusetts $9.4 9 Alabama $8.8 10 Arizona $8.7 11 Washington $7.6 12 Missouri $7.3 13 Georgia $6.5 14 New York $6.3 15 Kentucky $6.2 16 Colorado $5.9 17 New Jersey $5.4 18 Ohio $4.7 19 Illinois $4.4 20 District of Columbia $4.3 21 Minnesota $3.9 22 South Carolina $3.3 23 North Carolina $2.6 24 Michigan $2.5 25 Indiana $2.5 26 Mississippi $2.3 27 New Mexico $2.3 28 Hawaii $2.2 29 Louisiana $2.1 30 Oklahoma $1.9 31 Utah $1.6 32 Kansas $1.6 33 Alaska $1.5 34 Maine $1.4 35 Tennessee $1.4 36 Nevada $1.3 37 Wisconsin $1.3 38 New Hampshire $1.2 39 Iowa $1.1 40 Rhode Island $0.8 41 Nebraska $0.6 42 Arkansas $0.6 43 Oregon $0.6 44 Delaware $0.4 45 South Dakota $0.3 46 North Dakota $0.2 47 Montana $0.2 48 West Virginia $0.2 49 Idaho $0.2 50 Vermont $0.2 51 Wyoming $0.1 10 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

HOW TO READ THIS STUDY ALABAMA Every state s defense contract spending is broken out this way. Alabama had $8.8 billion in defense contract spending in fiscal 2014, the ninth most in the nation. That $8.8 billion was 4.4 percent of Alabama s 2014 gross domestic product (GDP), the third-highest percentage of any state in the nation. Top defense contractors include aerospace giants, technology products- and services-focused companies and logistics suppliers. Contracts are rolled up to parent companies using Blooomberg L.P. s company database. The largest military bases, including Coast Guard facilities, are listed by the number of military and civilian personnel as of Sept. 30, 2014. BGOV corrected the names of many military bases to better indicate their current use. Alabama s $8.8 billion in defense contract dollars were 3.3 percent of all unclassified defense contract dollars in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and represent $1,814 per state resident. On the map, defense contract dollars are shown by current congressional district. Districts with more spending are shaded a darker color. The range of the color scale changes for each state. Not all congressional districts are shown for every state. The green bar chart shows spending by appropriation title. The blue bar chart shows spending by military department. Spending for the Army Corps of Engineers is included in Army figures. Defensewide includes spending by all other defense agencies. The orange timeseries bar chart shows how defense contract spending has changed in the state every fiscal year since 2007. 11

ALABAMA 12 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

ALASKA 13

ARIZONA 14 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

ARKANSAS 15

CALIFORNIA 16 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

COLORADO 17

CONNECTICUT 18 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

DELAWARE 19

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

FLORIDA 21

GEORGIA 22 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

HAWAII 23

IDAHO 24 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

ILLINOIS 25

INDIANA 26 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

IOWA 27

KANSAS 28 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

KENTUCKY 29

LOUISIANA 30 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

MAINE 31

MARYLAND 32 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

MASSACHUSETTS 33

MICHIGAN 34 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

MINNESOTA 35

MISSISSIPPI 36 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

MISSOURI 37

MONTANA 38 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

NEBRASKA 39

NEVADA 40 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

NEW HAMPSHIRE 41

NEW JERSEY 42 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

NEW MEXICO 43

NEW YORK 44 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

NORTH CAROLINA 45

NORTH DAKOTA 46 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

OHIO 47

OKLAHOMA 48 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

OREGON 49

PENNSYLVANIA 50 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

RHODE ISLAND 51

SOUTH CAROLINA 52 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

SOUTH DAKOTA 53

TENNESSEE 54 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

TEXAS 55

UTAH 56 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

VERMONT 57

VIRGINIA 58 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

WASHINGTON 59

WEST VIRGINIA 60 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

WISCONSIN 61

WYOMING 62 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

ABOUT THE ANALYSTS ROBERT LEVINSON Senior defense analyst with Bloomberg Government. He is a retired lieutenant colonel in the United States Air Force. Prior to joining Bloomberg Government, Levinson worked for Booz Allen Hamilton as a strategic communications consultant. He has a bachelor s degree from the U.S. Air Force Academy and a master s from the University of California, San Diego. He is also a graduate of Harvard s program for Senior Executives in National and International Security. PAUL MURPHY Senior data analyst with Bloomberg Government. He has 30+ years of experience analyzing contract spend data for his former company, Eagle Eye Publishers, and since 2010 for Bloomberg Government. He brought the first desktop contracts database to market and authored analyses for the U.S. Small Business Administration that led to billions of dollars in increased awards to small businesses. He continues to pioneer new lines of research, creating hundreds of custom reports annually for Bloomberg Government clients and colleagues. KEVIN BRANCATO Bloomberg Government s director of government contracts research, specializing in defense procurement and spending. Before joining Bloomberg, he was a management scientist at the RAND Corporation, where he analyzed weapon system costs and defense manpower policies. He received a B.A. in math from Columbia University and a Ph.D. in economics from George Mason University. CAMERON LEUTHY Senior budget analyst with Bloomberg Government. He has more than 20 years of experience in analyzing budgets and legislation at the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Defense, and at Booz Allen Hamilton. His expertise includes the federal budget and the nexus of national security policy, operational requirements and funding. He has a bachelor s degree from Western Washington University and an MPA from the University of Washington. The authors would like to offer special thanks to editorial intern Meredith Berger and quantitative analyst Nicholas RisCassi for their superb and tireless fact checking. 63

BLOOMBERG GOVERNMENT ANALYTICS, INSIGHTS, ADVANTAGE. INFLUENCE ENHANCED. You know the bad news: Defense spending is on the decline and there are fewer chances than ever to influence legislation that brings more business to the states and districts that matter most to you. But here s the good news: Bloomberg Government is the only service designed to help you influence federal government outcomes. If it s your business to influence the future, you need the future of influence. Here s how we help: YOUR DAY STARTS HERE You re always expected to be on. That s why we are too. Bloomberg Government s dynamic, living homepage is your custom entry point to everything you need to do, when you need to do it. Wake up to our powerful, customized news digests in your inbox and get going. ACCESS: ANYTIME, ANYWHERE If you re winning on the issues or expanding your business, you re never sitting still. That s why Bloomberg Government goes with you, where you need to go. Download our mobile app to learn more. FOLLOW THE MONEY Size your market, identify procurement trends, view the competition and oversee your contracts with speed and precision. Analyze spending patterns across agencies, competitors and contracts. 64 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

STAY CURRENT Clients expect you to know it all and to know it first. Access the unparalleled breadth, depth and speed of Bloomberg Government s thousands of Washingtonarea reporters and analysts including Bloomberg BNA. Then, to make sure you never miss a beat, access 35,000+ aggregated sources customized to you, all in one place. CONDUCT OUTREACH Who you know matters. That s why Bloomberg Government gives you Washington s most comprehensive and accurate suite of contacts from federal agencies and government affairs professionals to members and congressional staff. Our directories are designed to expand your network. MONITOR LEGISLATION When they re in session, so are we. Get real-time updates on floor activity and markups, track legislation and save hours with bill summaries, CRS Reports, transcripts and more. If it s Congress, we re there and we ve got you covered better than anyone. ACCELERATE YOUR ACCESS Attend 100+ events per year intimate, fun and the fastest way to expand your network. Bloomberg Government subscribers get early access to Washington s most influential events. If it s your job to know, you need to know Bloomberg Government events. TRACK REGULATION Your days of monitoring regulations on clunky government websites are over. Streamline your workflow with a dashboard of everything you need to know about the rules that matter most every action, every comment, all in one place. GET SUPPORT, 24/7 We exist to help you succeed. Your dedicated account manager provides support and training for you and your team. And our client-support team is always available to help you with 24/7 support. 65

NOTES 66 Bloomberg Government Study: Defense Contract Spending - A State-by-State Analysis

THE FUTURE OF INFLUENCE.

Schedule a personalized demo, call 202-416-3450 bgov.com The data included in these materials are for illustrative purposes only. 2015 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. 626643047 1015