Another Trillion Racks Up For The US National Debt – OpEd
The U.S. government’s total public debt outstanding is on the verge of permanently surpassing $39 trillion. In truth, it already has, first breaching it on March 17, 2026. Since then, it’s bounced around that level, sometimes over, sometimes under.
This situation won’t last. Soon, the U.S. government will borrow even more money to support its excessive spending. When it does, it will leave $39 trillion in the rear-view mirror, probably for good.
Just like it did when it surpassed $38 trillion on October 23, 2025. Can you believe it took the U.S. government just 145 days to spend so much that it had to borrow another trillion dollars?
At least it slowed down. It only took the U.S. government 73 days to add another $1 trillion to the national debt after it blew past the $37 trillion milestone on August 11, 2025. That was after it had taken 263 days to pass the $36 trillion debt milestone on November 12, 2024.
Writing at RealClearMarkets, financial professional Jay Rogers describes the relative scale of the U.S. government’s borrowing binge:
The national debt crossed $39 trillion in March 2026, adding roughly $7.2 billion per day. Interest expense now exceeds $1 trillion annually — surpassing both the defense budget and Medicaid individually, and ranking third among all federal expenditure categories behind only Social Security and Medicare. The CBO projects debt held by the public rising from 101% to 120% of GDP by 2036, with cumulative deficits of $23.1 trillion over the decade. Every American household carries an implied share of approximately $288,000 and rising, borrowed without consent to fund programs many will never use.
The structural driver of the spending side is entitlement growth that neither party has shown the courage to reform. Social Security outlays grow from $1.6 trillion to $2.7 trillion by 2036; health care programs from $1.9 trillion to $3.1 trillion. Mandatory spending, entitlements plus interest, already consume more than two-thirds of federal outlays.
It could be worse. The Trump administration’s main initiative to reduce government spending is producing positive results. They are, however, dwarfed by Uncle Sam’s never-ending spending binge:
Discretionary cuts, including DOGE’s genuine efficiency push, cannot close this gap. Analysts estimate DOGE’s savings in the range of $1.4 billion to $7 billion, less than half of 1% of the annual deficit. That’s not waste disposal. That’s rearranging deck chairs. Whether those programs exist because revenue made them possible, or because the political class manufactured the revenue demand to sustain them, the obligations are real either way.
What is needed to rein in the growth of the U.S. government’s borrowing? Here’s where Rogers’ 30 years of experience in managing wealth comes through with practical suggestions:
Five structural corrections could alter the trajectory: a statutory deficit-to-GDP cap with automatic sequestration triggers that cannot be waived by the same Congress that enacted them; means-testing entitlement benefits to protect genuinely vulnerable households while eliminating transfers to those who do not need them; zero-based budgeting to replace the baseline fiction; a congressional stock trading ban and term limits to remove the financial incentives making legislative inaction personally profitable; and mandatory cost-per-outcome audits for all federal programs, results published. Any institutional investor applying these disciplines to a portfolio company would consider them unremarkable. In government, they are politically toxic precisely because they impose accountability on people whose careers depend on opacity.
Rogers correctly identifies the core problem: U.S. politicians have an overwhelming incentive problem in managing the government’s finances. It’s not that they cannot do it. They choose to pursue other priorities they believe are more rewarding for themselves.
As long as they get what they really want, why should they care if they rack up even more trillions in the national debt?
- This article was published at the Independent Institute