Debt, Deficits & Disaster: Can Washington Change Course?

These are questions that take cultures thousands of years to answer.

During Answer the Call, I take questions from people just like you about their problems, opportunities, challenges, or when they simply need advice.

How do I balance all of this grief, responsibility?

How do you repair this kind of damage?

My daughter, Michaela, guides the conversations as we hopefully help people navigate their lives.

Everyone has their own destiny.

Everyone.

The ever-expanding national debt continues to loom over every spending decision the federal government makes.

Yet, rarely do leaders take concrete steps to actually rein it in.

Despite budget hawks sounding the alarm, programs like Social Security are rapidly approaching a fiscal cliff.

In this episode, we sit down with an expert on the national debt to discuss the ways federal borrowing impacts the average American and what steps the Trump administration and congressional leaders can take to correct course before it's too late.

I'm Daily Wire executive editor John Bickley with Georgia Howe.

It's Sunday, August 24th, and this is a weekend edition of Morning Wire.

HelloFresh just launched their biggest menu transformation yet.

Chef crafted recipes and premium ingredients delivered fresh to your door.

This isn't the HelloFresh you knew, it's better.

HelloFresh has completely transformed their menu.

We're talking double the options with 100 recipes to choose from each week, including exciting new seasonal dishes and flavors from around the world, all in bigger portions that'll fill everyone up.

They've also gone all in on healthier eating, packing their menu with high protein options and veggie-loaded recipes that'll include two or more vegetables per dish to help you eat greener.

And here's the best part.

You can now get premium steak and seafood recipes delivered every single week at no extra cost with three times more seafood options than before.

Plus, you'll discover fresh seasonal produce like snap peas, stone fruit, and corn on the cob throughout the year.

And of course, I just mentioned it.

I am personally taking advantage of those steaks and seafood recipes.

I love how easy they are to cook.

The best way to cook just got better.

Head over to hellofresh.com slash Morningwire10 FM now to get 10 free meals and a free item for life.

One per box with active subscription.

Free meals applied as discounts on first box.

New subscribers only varies by plan.

That's hellofresh.com slash Morningwire10 FM to get 10 free meals and a free item for life.

Joining us now is Maya McGinnis, President of the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget.

Maya, thanks so much for coming on.

Thanks.

Thanks.

Thanks for having me.

So first, tell us, what exactly is the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget?

Other than a mouthful of a name,

it's a bipartisan non-profit watchdog group, basically.

We're very concerned about fiscal policy, meaning how big our debt and deficits are.

Doesn't have a political agenda at all.

I'm a political independent.

Our board and our staff is across the political spectrum, but deeply concerned that our political environment now focuses on borrowing when we shouldn't be because of the political benefits of not actually dealing with trade-offs.

And that concern has been growing over time.

Yeah, and I wanted to ask you exactly about that.

You've been warning about borrowing.

Why is this growing debt so dangerous for the U.S.

economy?

What specific ways will it actually impact Americans?

Yeah, and I think that's one of the biggest challenges about this whole issue is that it's really not something that feels directly related to us as individuals, but it's directly related to everything we care about.

So the fiscal health of the country is really the underpinning of both our economic and our national security strength.

So if your debt is too high, and ours without question is, every warning sign that there is is blinking bright, bright red right now.

But if your debt is too high, it actually means that the government borrows so much money, it squeezes out the investment possibilities in the private sector.

This slows growth.

This slows productivity.

pushes up inflation, up interest rates, all sorts of things that slow economic growth, which translates into lower wages, lower standard of living, less job security.

Nothing good on the economic front.

That's one.

Two, it means that our budget has huge pressure because interest payments start to absorb more and more of our resources.

Whether you want huge tax cuts or huge growth in spending, like we can fight about those things, but interest payments get the first claim on the dollar in the budget.

And that's becoming, it's right now, it's our second largest item in the budget, single fastest growing item.

It also means that when we have national emergencies where you should be borrowing, it's more more difficult to do so.

And it means that it can like, if you're trying to fight a recession or a pandemic or a national emergency, you may have skyrocketing or, you know, high pressure on upward interest rates when you're trying to borrow.

Whereas if your debt's lower, that doesn't happen.

But it's also expanded now where it's not just an economic issue.

It is a national security issue.

We are borrowing from countries with whom we are not aligned.

We are not able to make our own national security decisions just from a strategic and security perspective.

We have to think about budget resources, and you don't want to be in that position.

So it weakens our ability to respond to emergencies, take advantage of opportunities.

But bottom line, we can do fewer things and we become poorer as a nation.

And finally, I guess for those people who worry about the next generation,

it's really, really posing a generation that's already facing so many challenges.

such a much more difficult and fast pace changing world where we have tied up their budget with interest payments and promises to seniors and they don't have the fiscal flexibility to respond, and they owe a whole lot of debt because of borrowing that we took on.

Like you said, it's insidious because you don't feel a lot of these effects.

It's a lot of things that we can't do that we could have done if we had more money available.

So you don't realize how much we're missing out on in terms of investment in private companies and things like that.

And then kicking the can down the road.

We're not feeling it now.

Our kids will feel it.

Their kids will feel it.

Is there any progress, do you feel, in Washington to paying attention to this?

Do we see any progress at all?

Yeah, it's so discouraging, honestly, because the situation is getting worse.

Our debt to GDP is getting worse.

Our annual deficits are getting worse.

And this is outside of emergencies.

And frankly, our political environment and a willingness to talk about this honestly is much, much worse.

We're so polarized.

You have both parties basically fighting with each other by giving away more things.

I'll give you tax cuts, no taxes on this.

Oh, well, I'll give you bigger tax cuts and I'll increase the spending.

I'll also increase the spending.

It used to be that you thought of Republicans as wanting tax cuts and Democrats as wanting spending increases.

It's literally now both.

So they fight for these huge giveaways.

So, no, frankly, the situation is very troubling, both from an economic, national security, but also political perspective.

And internally, because it's frustrating to work on an issue where you know we're not going to have the big debt deal that we really need to have this year, for instance, a lot of times the best we can do and sort of why we're able to pat ourselves on the back for some work is when things would have been worse without the kind of fiscal pressure we put on.

But it's really frustrating to say, well, we borrowed a trillion dollars, but we might have borrowed a trillion and a half if it weren't for our pushing against this issue.

We've got to do better than that.

We've got to start actually turning the ship around and bringing the debt as a share of GDP trajectory down instead of continuing to grow it.

I wanted to ask you about the debt ceiling in a second, but first, President Trump has put a lot of pressure on Fed chair Jerome Powell over the interest rate.

How does the interest rate play into all this?

Well, basically, you can think of what we've done to ourselves as though we've signed the whole country up for a huge credit card teaser rate, and we are about to get hit with a real problem.

I think the pressure on the Fed is very counterproductive.

I think that the Fed needs to control inflation because inflation is one of the most damaging things we can see from the excessive borrowing that we've had.

We saw that when we hit 9%.

We don't want to see higher inflation again.

We are incredibly vulnerable to higher interest rates.

The reason there's upward pressure on interest rates is because we're borrowing so much.

But if interest rates go up by just another one percentage point above what they're expected to, that leads to $300 billion a year in additional borrowing.

on top of the almost a trillion dollars a year we're already paying for borrowing costs.

So that is what's so dangerous, that when interest rates go up, we owe so much more in interest payments.

But what concerns me is that the Trump administration and others,

they're trying to find ways to increase the demand for treasuries.

So there's some policies that are being changed, the maturities on the debt that we're issuing, other things

that will create higher demand for treasuries.

What we really should be doing is creating a lower supply.

If we weren't auctioning off so many treasuries because we had to finance such a big deficit, that upward pressure on interest rates wouldn't occur.

And we could actually help the Fed do their job of fighting inflation instead of making fiscal policy make their job even more difficult.

So did I hear you correctly in that there is some logic in the idea of lowering interest rates so that our own debt is paid off easier?

Is this correct in terms of the federal government or am I misunderstanding that?

Okay.

Yeah, so we would like to have lower interest rates, but they won't really happen just because the Fed lowers the short-term rate.

That won't do anything for the important rates, which are longer term, like 10 years, things that affect your mortgage, for instance.

The only way we do that is by controlling our macroeconomy and issuing less.

Like the more we're borrowing, the more the people who lend us money domestically and internationally are going to demand higher interest rates to deal with the risk of all the treasuries that we are auctioning off.

You can't kind of cheat those real interest rates by asking the Fed to push down low term rates.

It won't work.

And that's when you see the

higher rates in the tenure and the things that we keep an eye on as a result.

So the best thing the Fed can do is keep its credibility and control inflation and not let political pressure in any direction affect its decision-making.

So the most important thing is responsible handling of the economy and managing of the economy for that confidence in our economy to be maintained internationally.

Yeah.

And also remembering

there's different time windows for things.

So the political cycle is very short term, right?

You always want it now.

That's where we borrow today and don't worry about the future.

The Fed is one of the institutions that we hope is keeping an eye on the long term as well, knowing that if we make these short-term, expedient decisions now, it can harm the economy in the long term.

And that is one of the most important things that they can do.

But security, reassurance, independence, those all have to be part of the Fed's mandate.

Now, the debt ceiling has been a major topic in D.C.

in this last well, forever, it seems like now.

But we really had a battle over it this last year.

We continue to raise the debt ceiling.

Is there anyone to actually stop that trend?

How should we approach that conversation?

So what's important to understand is that the debt ceiling is really, it's kind of ill-constructed in that we pass legislation where we approve a borrowing.

We just passed a big tax cut bill that's going to add $4 trillion over $5 trillion if some of the policies are made permanent to the national debt.

So you pass that bill and then later, and in fact, in this bill, they did include increasing the debt ceiling quite significantly.

So that will last for a couple of years.

But then you have a separate vote generally on whether to lift the debt ceiling.

And what we often have is people saying, I am voting against lifting the debt ceiling because I don't want more borrowing.

Well, that's great, unless you've just voted for legislation that actually has the borrowing.

And we've seen that time and time again.

So what would really make sense is if we have the debt ceiling as a part of any vote to increase the debt.

So you have to say, I am passing legislation that would increase our borrowing.

Therefore, I'm also increasing the debt ceiling.

My pitch to everybody would be, how about we make a commitment?

No new borrowing, no more legislation that does increase borrowing.

Let's focus our attention on how to get control of this for, again, so many of these reasons, from economic to national security, to intergenerational fairness, to being prepared for emergencies.

Let's make a commitment that there's no new borrowing, but the debt ceiling doesn't control it.

So it actually ends up having us focus on the right thing, but at the wrong time after the fact.

Do we have some good models of this actually taking place within the country, some states that are handling this well that the federal government could emulate?

The states have much stricter requirements on them where the vast majority of them have balanced budget requirements.

Now, there's a huge loophole, which is that doesn't count for

capital investment or borrowing for what are called investments.

And oftentimes you see everybody's favorite project being called an investment, but at least in an attempt to limit it.

And I do think there's a good model there, which is we can start to put in some fiscal constraints on the federal level.

So, for instance, when you pass a budget,

and the craziest thing about all this is that we actually don't pass real budgets at the federal level anymore.

More often than not, we either don't pass a budget at all and just use something called a continuing resolution, or we pass a budget like we did this year fully for the purpose of allowing tax cuts, but not even looking at the rest of the budget.

But we should pass budgets each and every year.

Every business has to.

Certainly every country should.

But within that, we should also have fiscal limits.

So right now, our deficit is about 6% of GDP.

Many people, including the Secretary of the Treasury, Ray Dalio, other experts, many outside groups, including us, think we need to really pick an important fiscal target of, say, bringing that deficit from 6% of GDP down to 3% of GDP.

We should embed something like that.

Pick whatever goal makes sense.

It used to be balancing the budget.

Sadly, we're so out of control now that we're not going to be able to balance the budget in a reasonable amount of time.

So we need a more modest goal.

But say we pick 3% of GDP, that should be embedded in the budget.

And every, I believe every lawmaker who has a fiduciary responsibility should support a budget that gets to 3% of GDP.

We can look at all the different options.

and then figure out how to work out the differences and do something we're not very good at in Washington, but try to compromise on that.

But right now, now, the budgets don't have any constraints, and that's one of the big problems right there.

So yes, learning from the states that you have to have some kind of fiscal constraint, I think is an important lesson.

A final question.

Do we see any evidence of that kind of momentum in Congress?

Is any congressional leader actually working on something to that effect or that might get us at least make some progress in terms of this debt problem?

You know, there really is progress.

There's a lot of progress, both on individual members who care about this, but also groups that are popping up.

There's one that we work with, the bipartisan fiscal forum in the house, which is a bipartisan group working on this.

Problem solvers, lots of different leaders who care about the issue.

There's a lot of things they're focusing on.

I think the most important one we just talked about, picking a fiscal goal and working on that.

Second, there's been broad-based support, bipartisan and bicameral, for a fiscal commission, something that would bring together a bunch of members and have them work for a year on understanding the different priorities, the trade-offs, the actual numbers.

They need some time to really dig into this.

And I will tell you, once you do, you don't walk away thinking we can ignore this problem.

You know we need to work on it and come up with a lot of solutions that then there would be an up or down vote in Congress.

That gives some political cover.

So a fiscal commission, I think, has a lot of promise and luckily has a good deal of support.

Third, we have got to do something about Social Security.

Social Security, the largest program in the country, 70 million people depend on it.

It is going to be insolvent in seven years.

At which time, when we can't afford to pay benefits, there'll be across-the-board benefit cuts.

We need to get to work fixing Social Security as quickly as possible.

Well, let's hope we do see some real progress on all of these issues.

Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us.

Thank you so much for having me.

That was Maya McGinnis, President of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, and this has been a weekend edition of Morningwire.