Who is monitoring the debt?

People of a certain age will recall a lyric from the Tennessee Ernie Ford song "Sixteen Tons": "Another day older and deeper in debt." I thought of that song as Secretary of War Pete Hegseth asked Congress to approve a $1.5 trillion budget for fiscal year 2027 to put the military on what he called a "wartime footing." Hegseth says the Pentagon needs the money for more drones, munitions and modernized systems. Though President Trump has denied it, bragging that we have the strongest military in the world, it would appear that the Iran conflict has significantly depleted U.S military resources. Whatever Congress decides to do in response to Hegseth's request will be done with borrowed money, because we don't have enough resources — and haven't for some time — to pay for the unrestrained spending Congress loves to do. Notice there were no pledges of cost reductions in Hegseth's request. There never are when it comes to government. If you want to be shocked, assuming we are shocked about much these days, visit usdebtclock.org and watch the numbers rise faster than a space rocket. It's $39 trillion and counting with the average cost to each American family of $114,130, according to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. No nation in history has ever been able to shoulder such debt and survive. The politicians don't seem to care as long as they can dole out money to keep themselves in office. I have written about the debt before, but it bears repeating until Congress takes action. What frustrates those who are paying attention to the debt is that it is not an unsolvable problem. It's been fixed before, even within recent memory for many people. In the mid-1990s, an unlikely partnership was forged between President Bill Clinton and Speaker Newt Gingrich to address the debt, which had increased from $4.8 trillion to $5.6 trillion. Chump change compared to today. From fiscal years 1998 to 2001, thanks to the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, the federal government achieved four consecutive budget surpluses. There was still debt but surpluses were reducing it. What created the surpluses? Clinton and Gingrich addressed the biggest drivers of the debt — Medicare and Medicaid, the so-called "third rail." They managed to cut $115 billion in Medicare spending, $14 billion in Medicaid, along with significant reductions in discretionary spending to eliminate the deficit by 2002. Much of this was done by removing fraudsters and the unentitled from the rolls. Sound familiar? While Vice President JD Vance has been tasked with rooting out fraud as in the child care centers in Minnesota, no one wants to re-visit Medicare and Medicaid, especially with elections just five months away. Somebody has to do it. According to the Kiplinger Retirement Report and numerous other projections, the "Medicare Hospital Insurance (Part A) trust fund is projected to be exhausted by 2033-2040, requiring automatic benefit cuts of 11-13% if not addressed. While Medicare itself won't totally 'run out,' it will only cover roughly 89-90% of costs. Medicaid is funded differently via federal/state taxes, so it does not face the same 'trust fund' insolvency, but is facing severe funding pressure, with 2025 legislation implementing significant cuts." These would not be tough choices if the public was properly prepared. The reduction in benefits and/or an increase in taxes is inevitable. Means testing, allowing people to choose a hybrid retirement fund combining reduced Social Security payments with investments in the stock market and other reforms would save the programs for those who need it and allow more individuals to care for themselves instead of burdening the government. Simple, right? If only the politicians would do what they know must be done. Readers may email Cal Thomas at tcaeditors@tribpub.com.