Guest Editorial: Tom Gaitens
For more than 30 years, I have been part of a movement warning that the United States is on an unsustainable fiscal path. From my early work with Empower America and Citizens for a Sound Economy to my later work with FreedomWorks, the message has been consistent. That means our political system is dependent on spending, allergic to accountability, and unwilling to confront reality.
By the time the Tea Party movement emerged in 2009, these warnings had become more urgent, but they were by no means new. For decades, elected officials at all levels—local, state, and federal—have chosen expediency over responsibility. They hide their heads, postpone difficult choices, and pass the responsibility on to the next generation.
Today, its influence is undeniable.
The United States has approximately $39 trillion in debt, with tens of trillions more in unfunded debt. Considering the total federal obligation, the estimated value is more than $136 trillion, which is a multiple of annual economic output. This is not a partisan issue. It’s a structural reality. And no, you can’t just “grow out of it.” Economic growth can never keep up with promises that are not based on fiscal calculations.
Meanwhile, we spend nearly $1 trillion each year just on debt servicing, money that provides no measurable public benefit. It does not build roads, strengthen national defense, or improve education. Interest is only paid on yesterday’s excess amount.
The real cause of this crisis is not discretionary spending (which is part of the annual budget that Congress considers), but so-called “mandatory” spending programs that automatically expand. This distinction has been intentionally blurred in public discussion, but it is important. Without structural reform, these obligations will continue to expand regardless of who takes office.
There was a time when reform was within reach. Ronald Reagan tried to stabilize the system, but Congress undermined long-term discipline by expanding entitlement commitments elsewhere. In 2005, George W. Bush proposed individual retirement accounts as a path to solvency. The idea was rooted in previous bipartisan discussions, including the Hyde Park Declaration. Despite prior support from members of both parties, it was rejected by a one-vote margin.
This failure was not just a legislative failure, but a symbolic one. Even when presented with viable reforms, the political class balks. Incentives work in the opposite direction. That means promising more, spending more, and winning the next election. Fiscal restraint, by contrast, is politically punishing.
This is not an issue limited to one party. Democrats often embrace expanded government as a means of redistribution and political consolidation. Republicans, on the other hand, frequently acknowledge the problem but lack the will to act decisively when in power. Whether it’s Barack Obama, Gavin Newsom, or Congressional leaders like Mike Johnson and John Thune, leadership leaves, but the trajectory remains the same.
Essentially, this is a failure of governance. For almost a century, the political class has built a system based on promises that cannot be kept. The program was expanded without sustainable funding. Profits were guaranteed without honest accounting. And every generation of leaders found it easier to postpone liquidation than face it.
Even Franklin D. Roosevelt understood the importance of balancing structure and sustainability when designing Social Security. But key elements of that vision changed from the start, setting the stage for long-term imbalance. The warning was there from the beginning.
Today we are no longer discussing distant issues. There are currently accelerating risks to the U.S. fiscal trajectory. Pension systems are underfunded. Rights programs are under strain. Debt servicing has displaced the nation’s priorities. And meaningful reform remains politically untouchable.
As we approach our nation’s 250th anniversary, the question we must face is whether a system built on perpetual postponement can survive indefinitely.
The answers will not come from rhetoric or blame-shifting. It will require political courage that has been lacking so far: leaders willing to tell hard truths, make unpopular decisions, and prioritize long-term stability over short-term gains.
Without it, the pattern of more spending, more debt, and more delays continues until delay is no longer an option.
