Washington’s inflation-adjusted economic output, annual growth, industry structure, and employment context.
Real GDP$715.88B2025 · #9 of 50 · highest first
Annual real GDP growth3.2%2025 · #5 of 50 · highest first
Current-dollar GDP$892.25B2025 · #10 of 50 · highest first
Washington over time
Explore Washington readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Washington officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Washington effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Washington change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Real GDP Washington · source units
WashingtonPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
0 of 0 reviewed Washington actions match · 0 date markers shown. 29 major events shown separately.
Washington · 2025: $715.88B · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T
Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars. Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Washington · state comparison
Washington output and growth
Annual real GDP removes price changes. Annual growth compares annual levels; it is separate from an annualized quarterly growth rate.
Washington · 2025$715.88B
Washington rank#9among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$23.94TSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Real GDP
Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars.
Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Washington
2025 · Washington: $715.88B · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Washington Real GDP history
Period
Washington
Compare
2014
$456.19B
2015
$476.72B
2016
$495.72B
2017
$527.17B
2018
$561.72B
2019
$588.69B
2020
$586.26B
2021
$626.71B
2022
$641.88B
2023
$666.63B
2024
$693.91B
2025
$715.88B
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Washington stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Washington has a dark outline.
Lower value · $38.06BHigher value · $3.43TStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Washington · $715.88B2025 · Rank #9 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Washington with every state · 50 ranked
Real GDP · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
$3.43T
—
#2
Texas
$2.33T
—
#3
New York
$1.89T
—
#4
Florida
$1.38T
—
#5
Illinois
$948.03B
—
#6
Pennsylvania
$815.87B
—
#7
Ohio
$738.49B
—
#8
Georgia
$719.74B
—
#9
Washington · your comparison
$715.88B
—
#10
New Jersey
$688.76B
—
#11
North Carolina
$682.83B
—
#12
Massachusetts
$640.79B
—
#13
Virginia
$631.98B
—
#14
Michigan
$575.4B
—
#15
Colorado
$452.78B
—
#16
Arizona
$451.49B
—
#17
Tennessee
$447.66B
—
#18
Maryland
$437.37B
—
#19
Indiana
$422.47B
—
#20
Minnesota
$392.31B
—
#21
Wisconsin
$363.84B
—
#22
Missouri
$362.46B
—
#23
Connecticut
$297.35B
—
#24
South Carolina
$287.16B
—
#25
Oregon
$264.75B
—
#26
Louisiana
$263.89B
—
#27
Alabama
$259.46B
—
#28
Utah
$243.04B
—
#29
Kentucky
$239.51B
—
#30
Oklahoma
$216.31B
—
#31
Nevada
$210.1B
—
#32
Iowa
$204.86B
—
#33
Kansas
$178.51B
—
#34
Nebraska
$156.61B
—
#35
Arkansas
$147.93B
—
#36
Mississippi
$123.37B
—
#37
New Mexico
$122.58B
—
#38
Idaho
$103.62B
—
#39
New Hampshire
$99.06B
—
#40
Hawaii
$93.38B
—
#41
Delaware
$89.92B
—
#42
West Virginia
$84.94B
—
#43
Maine
$77.23B
—
#44
Rhode Island
$67.25B
—
#45
North Dakota
$65.27B
—
#46
Montana
$61.08B
—
#47
South Dakota
$59.87B
—
#48
Alaska
$56.34B
—
#49
Wyoming
$40.16B
—
#50
Vermont
$38.06B
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Choose an industry to compare Washington’s output with every state. Nominal industry values can be added within a year.
Washington · 2025$8.05B
Washington rank#7among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$255.93BSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output
Industry value added, current dollars. The broad industries listed form an exhaustive partition of total GDP.
A large industry output rank can reflect the size of the state. Chained-dollar components should not be added.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Washington
2025 · Washington: $8.05B · Rank #7 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Washington Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
Period
Washington
Compare
2014
$6.92B
2015
$7.74B
2016
$7.11B
2017
$7.14B
2018
$7.62B
2019
$7.74B
2020
$7.6B
2021
$8.03B
2022
$9.5B
2023
$8.61B
2024
$8.49B
2025
$8.05B
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Washington stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Washington has a dark outline.
Lower value · $164.2MHigher value · $50.67BStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Washington · $8.05B2025 · Rank #7 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Washington with every state · 50 ranked
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
$50.67B
—
#2
Texas
$16.95B
—
#3
Iowa
$14.1B
—
#4
Nebraska
$10.6B
—
#5
Illinois
$9.52B
—
#6
Florida
$8.33B
—
#7
Washington · your comparison
$8.05B
—
#8
Minnesota
$8.01B
—
#9
Indiana
$7.13B
—
#10
South Dakota
$7.08B
—
#11
Kansas
$7.02B
—
#12
Ohio
$7B
—
#13
Wisconsin
$6.58B
—
#14
Oregon
$6.18B
—
#15
Michigan
$6.02B
—
#16
Missouri
$5.71B
—
#17
North Carolina
$5.55B
—
#18
Idaho
$5.41B
—
#19
Pennsylvania
$4.97B
—
#20
North Dakota
$4.71B
—
#21
Georgia
$4.53B
—
#22
Oklahoma
$4.26B
—
#23
Arkansas
$4.13B
—
#24
Kentucky
$3.75B
—
#25
New York
$3.55B
—
#26
Alabama
$3.29B
—
#27
Mississippi
$2.99B
—
#28
Colorado
$2.98B
—
#29
Arizona
$2.85B
—
#30
Montana
$2.49B
—
#31
Louisiana
$2.42B
—
#32
Virginia
$2.37B
—
#33
Tennessee
$2.01B
—
#34
New Mexico
$1.7B
—
#35
South Carolina
$1.63B
—
#36
Utah
$1.59B
—
#37
Maryland
$1.31B
—
#38
New Jersey
$1.27B
—
#39
Maine
$1.2B
—
#40
Wyoming
$888.5M
—
#41
Massachusetts
$869.6M
—
#42
Delaware
$741.1M
—
#43
West Virginia
$561.8M
—
#44
Hawaii
$553.9M
—
#45
Nevada
$551.2M
—
#46
Vermont
$536.1M
—
#47
Alaska
$488.1M
—
#48
Connecticut
$341.8M
—
#49
New Hampshire
$320.1M
—
#50
Rhode Island
$164.2M
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
BEA’s total employment counts jobs, including proprietors, rather than distinct people.
Washington · 20254,879,224
Washington rank#14among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark218,324,700Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Total employment · jobs
BEA annual total full-time and part-time employment, including proprietors. One person can hold multiple jobs.
Separate from residence-based civilian employment in BLS LAUS and from nonfarm payroll employment.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Washington
2025 · Washington: 4,879,224 · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Washington Total employment · jobs history
Period
Washington
Compare
2014
4,094,839
2015
4,199,867
2016
4,314,703
2017
4,433,544
2018
4,539,582
2019
4,594,388
2020
4,438,563
2021
4,578,926
2022
4,760,255
2023
4,821,444
2024
4,863,087
2025
4,879,224
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Washington stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Washington has a dark outline.
Lower value · 439,349Higher value · 25,407,891Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Washington · 4,879,2242025 · Rank #14 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Washington with every state · 50 ranked
Total employment · jobs · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
25,407,891
—
#2
Texas
20,639,097
—
#3
Florida
15,174,955
—
#4
New York
13,498,360
—
#5
Illinois
8,197,037
—
#6
Pennsylvania
8,150,272
—
#7
Ohio
7,394,537
—
#8
Georgia
7,184,433
—
#9
North Carolina
6,864,520
—
#10
New Jersey
6,095,348
—
#11
Michigan
5,946,187
—
#12
Virginia
5,789,397
—
#13
Massachusetts
5,020,627
—
#14
Washington · your comparison
4,879,224
—
#15
Tennessee
4,633,711
—
#16
Arizona
4,455,141
—
#17
Colorado
4,231,488
—
#18
Indiana
4,213,622
—
#19
Maryland
4,009,451
—
#20
Missouri
3,998,549
—
#21
Minnesota
3,914,167
—
#22
Wisconsin
3,855,203
—
#23
South Carolina
3,245,739
—
#24
Alabama
2,966,686
—
#25
Louisiana
2,831,737
—
#26
Kentucky
2,718,290
—
#27
Oregon
2,671,758
—
#28
Oklahoma
2,466,719
—
#29
Utah
2,458,247
—
#30
Connecticut
2,424,541
—
#31
Nevada
2,163,825
—
#32
Iowa
2,122,389
—
#33
Kansas
2,007,083
—
#34
Arkansas
1,811,561
—
#35
Mississippi
1,713,294
—
#36
Nebraska
1,410,465
—
#37
Idaho
1,238,642
—
#38
New Mexico
1,183,906
—
#39
New Hampshire
942,254
—
#40
Hawaii
925,451
—
#41
West Virginia
910,570
—
#42
Maine
898,379
—
#43
Montana
761,061
—
#44
Rhode Island
690,505
—
#45
Delaware
678,218
—
#46
South Dakota
665,420
—
#47
North Dakota
605,276
—
#48
Alaska
472,008
—
#49
Wyoming
451,906
—
#50
Vermont
439,349
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
0 of 0 reviewed Washington actions · newest first
No reviewed actions match these filters.
How Washington action records are selected
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Washington officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 4, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about GDP, economic growth and production from FactVote’s Washington candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
10 statements from 6 candidates
2026 Washington U.S. House — District 1 — General Election
2 candidates with matching statements · 2 statements
For too long, short-sighted economic policies have allowed multinational corporations to hollow out America’s middle class from within. Offshoring has stripped away vital manufacturing capabilities, leaving our local economies vulnerable. I believe it is time to reverse this trend. By implementing p…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economy, jobs, taxes, and affordability
Candidate campaign source
For too long, short-sighted economic policies have allowed multinational corporations to hollow out America’s middle class from within. Offshoring has stripped away vital manufacturing capabilities, leaving our local economies vulnerable. I believe it is time to reverse this trend. By implementing policy-driven solutions that incentivize domestic production, we can return high-quality jobs to Washington and rebuild our economic independence.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
We need a Congress that will focus on putting working families and broad economic growth first, and that’s what I’m fighting for every day. I continue to champion efforts that provide tax relief for the middle-class, including the enhanced Child Tax Credit and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. The …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economic Security and Rising Costs for Families
Candidate campaign source
We need a Congress that will focus on putting working families and broad economic growth first, and that’s what I’m fighting for every day. I continue to champion efforts that provide tax relief for the middle-class, including the enhanced Child Tax Credit and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. The enhanced Child Tax Credit was included in the American Rescue Plan and provided families with monthly checks for 6 months and lifted 3 million kids out of poverty. I am also the lead sponsor of legislation that would create or preserve more than 2 million affordable housing units nationwide in the next decade and address the growing housing crisis.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy Independence and Affordability
Candidate campaign source
Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
Financial Freedom and Cryptocurrency With her background in banking, Amanda McKinney understands the importance of financial freedom and innovation.She supports cryptocurrency and blockchain innovation as tools for economic growth, privacy, and American leadership. Amanda opposes using regulation to…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Cryptocurrency and financial privacy
Candidate campaign source
Financial Freedom and Cryptocurrency With her background in banking, Amanda McKinney understands the importance of financial freedom and innovation.She supports cryptocurrency and blockchain innovation as tools for economic growth, privacy, and American leadership. Amanda opposes using regulation to monitor or control lawful financial activity.In Congress, she will fight to keep financial innovation in the United States and protect Americans from government overreach.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
Energy Independence and Affordability Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.She opposes radical energy mandates that raise costs, destabilize the grid, and hurt…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy independence and affordability
Candidate campaign source
Energy Independence and Affordability Energy independence is national security. Amanda McKinney supports American energy dominance through hydropower, nuclear energy, natural gas, and responsible domestic production.She opposes radical energy mandates that raise costs, destabilize the grid, and hurt farmers, families, and small businesses. Amanda believes America should never depend on foreign adversaries for energy.In Congress, she will fight for affordable, reliable energy, protect jobs, and put American workers first.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
In our country today, there is too much wealth in too few hands. We can build a better future for all of us by strengthening the middle class, by giving folks the opportunity to earn a good wage and benefits, keep their lights on and food on their table, and have money in their pockets. We can creat…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Lowering Costs for Families
Candidate campaign source
In our country today, there is too much wealth in too few hands. We can build a better future for all of us by strengthening the middle class, by giving folks the opportunity to earn a good wage and benefits, keep their lights on and food on their table, and have money in their pockets. We can create more jobs and grow our economy through comprehensive regulatory frameworks that encourage innovation while protecting consumers.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
I believe in an economy that works from the middle class out–not trickle down–putting working families at the center of economic policies. I believe in equal pay for equal work, a tax structure that requires big business to pay its fair share, and in creating good jobs by investing in small and mid-…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Lowering Costs for Families
Candidate campaign source
I believe in an economy that works from the middle class out–not trickle down–putting working families at the center of economic policies. I believe in equal pay for equal work, a tax structure that requires big business to pay its fair share, and in creating good jobs by investing in small and mid-sized businesses. I believe in the importance of driving technological innovation and economic growth, including through blockchain technology and the digital asset industry. I believe in removing the barriers to economic freedom and opportunity for our most marginalized communities such as communities of color, LGBTQ folks, and the disability community.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
This section matches specific GDP, economic growth and production terms in retained, attributed source text from published Washington candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Washington incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Washington legislators and Washington’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Washington’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
0 matching sponsorships or proposals · 0 Washington incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
No retained proposals match these filters. A missing record does not mean an incumbent has taken no action.
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us
Only current Washington officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Washington statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 4, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Washington snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Washington, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.