The national debt is out of hand, recently surpassing $39 trillion, yet it is largely ignored. While we might notice symptoms, like longer TSA lines at the airport, we often overlook the cause: federal spending and the national debt are on an unsustainable trajectory. The resulting fiscal pressure is already leading to cuts that are likely to accelerate. That reality leaves states like Iowa, which are heavily reliant on federal funds, highly exposed and in need of preparation for what comes next.
Representative Jodey Arrington (R-TX), who chairs the House Budget Committee noted that it “took roughly 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion” in debt. “Now we add that in a matter of months. Every child in America today carries a $530,000 share of this debt—a crushing legacy we must reverse,” stated Rep. Arrington.
Americans have grown numb to the national debt. Each year the amount increases, but nothing is being done to address the issue. Government spending continues to accelerate unchecked even with President Donald Trump’s efforts to make targeted cuts with his DOGE initiative. The result of DOGE was Elon Musk fleeing the White House in frustration just as quickly as the Union Army retreated during the Battle of Bull Run.
“Compounding the problem, we now spend more than $1 trillion a year just on interest to service our debt—more than the entire defense budget… The national debt continues to pose an existential threat to the future of our nation,” warned Rep. Arrington. In Fiscal Year 2025, debt interest payments hit a new record of over $1 trillion or 18% of annual revenue, and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently reported that the federal government “added $696 billion to the national debt over the past four months.”
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimates that “continued federal deficits will add an average of $2 trillion to U.S. debt each year through 2036.” Unfunded liabilities in entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare are also serious issues driving the debt crisis, with estimates placing the true burden far higher when those obligations are included. The National Taxpayer’s Union (NTU) describes the outlook as “grim,” noting that debt levels could reach 120% of GDP within a decade, while “reducing government spending…reveals the heavy lift ahead for lawmakers to bring our nation to fiscal balance.”
The current fiscal outlook of the federal government should be an “iceberg ahead” warning for Iowa policymakers at all levels. The current debt trajectories demonstrate that more cuts may be forced upon a variety of programs. While some spending programs are being renewed, others are being cut.
The Cedar Rapids Gazette reported that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is eliminating the Increasing Land, Capital and Market Access Program, a $300 million initiative launched in 2023 to help beginning and underserved farmers, including two Iowa projects set to lose $4.3 million in federal funds. The cancellation, attributed to “fiscal discipline,” highlights how federal funding decisions directly impact state and local governments. With Iowa expected to receive nearly $11 billion in federal funds against a proposed $9.6 billion state budget, the move serves as a reminder that states rely heavily on federal support and must be prepared for the possibility of those funds being reduced or eliminated.
In fact, during this legislative session, Iowa’s budget is being directly impacted by federal funds and federal policy. As a result of the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” the legislature had to pass a measure to temporarily increase the premium tax on health insurance organizations to cover the deficits in Medicaid. For Fiscal Year 2026, Iowa is estimated to have a $90 million deficit in Medicaid and close to a $200 million deficit is projected for Fiscal Year 2027.
Iowa lawmakers have already taken an important step toward preparing for this reality by advancing House Study Bill 764, which moves the state in the right direction. That bill would ensure Iowa receives full transparency before accepting federal funds, ensuring lawmakers understand the costs, conditions, and long-term obligations tied to each dollar. Too often states commit to federal programs without knowing key details like matching requirements, regulatory strings, or future liabilities, effectively making major fiscal decisions without complete information.
From there, states should build in stronger legislative oversight and ongoing tracking of federal funds, treating them not as “free money,” but as policy commitments that require accountability and long-term planning. The goal is not to reject federal funds outright, but to accept them with eyes wide open, to states can better manage risk, avoid unexpected budget pressures, and maintain control over their own fiscal future.
The warning signs are no longer abstract, they are showing up in real budgets, real programs, and real tradeoffs. If Washington continues down its current path, the question is not whether states like Iowa will feel the impact, but how prepared they will be when they do. By building on steps like House Study Bill 764 and adopting a more disciplined, transparent approach to federal funds, Iowa can move from being exposed to being resilient. The states that navigate this moment best will not be the ones that chase every federal dollar, but the ones that understand the risks, plan ahead, and maintain control over their own fiscal future.
Print a PDF