same number of jobs created in a large state such as California, Texas, or Florida. Again we observe states beginning to emerge as clear winners that few would normally associate closely with the Space Program. These include Colorado, the District of Columbia, New Mexico, Mississippi, New Jersey, Washington, Kansas, Missouri, and New Hampshire. Table 4 and columns 1 and 2 of Table 5 are based on the total impacts of NASA spending and, as noted, are to a large degree dominated by the five states receiving the large prime contract awards. Column 3 of Table 5 ranks the top 20 states on the basis of the indirect benefits received from the Space Program - the economic activity generated within the state by the indirect effects of NASA procurement in all the other states. This column shows if there are substantial benefits to those states that do not receive large prime contract awards from NASA, and from the information in this table it is clear that these important benefits do exist. Once again, California and Texas dominate the ranking of winners in this table, but abstracting from this, the results are interesting. First, several of the major prime contract award states, such as Maryland, Alabama, and Utah no longer even appear. Thus, while these states benefit substantially from the direct procurement awards, they receive relatively little indirect economic stimulus from NASA-induced business in other states. Second, other major prime contract award states, such as Florida, Louisiana, Connecticut, and Virginia, are now ranked much lower. Again, these states do not contain the types of industries that benefit from the indirect economic stimulus of the NASA expenditures. Third, Ohio, which ranks tenth in terms of prime contract awards, now ranks third on the basis of its industrial infrastructure. Finally, and most interesting, we find a new set of states identified as major (indirect) benefactors of the U.S. Space Program. These include the major manufacturing states of New York, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Missouri, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. These states represent the manufacturing heartland of the U.S. and benefit substantially by producing the products required by the prime contractors and the subcontractors to NASA. Other states noteworthy in column 3 include Georgia, Massachusetts, Washington, North Carolina, and Tennessee. Each of these states has a total/direct multiplier well above the average of 2.1, and the multipliers for several of these states exceed 10 to 1 - see Table 6. Thus, as shown in this table: • For every dollar Michigan receives directly in Space Program funds, it receives $10 indirectly in Program-induced business • For every dollar Illinois receives directly in Space Program funds, it receives $7 indirectly in Program-induced business
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==