America's Credit Is Falling—and the Government Is Still Digging Deeper Into Debt
The lesson from the Moody's credit downgrade is that the U.S. cannot borrow its way to prosperity.

America's debt-addicted government just lost its triple-A credit rating from Moody's, as it previously had from fellow rating agencies S&P and Fitch. Many in Washington shrugged the move off as minor or as unfair treatment of the Trump administration. The truth is more sobering: a flashing red signal that the United States is no longer seen as a "perfect" credit risk and that politicians should stop pretending economic growth alone can bail us out.
Yes, the mess is real, and it's because habitual deficit financing—the very disease fiscally-minded Founding Father Alexander Hamilton warned against—has become business as usual.
The reckoning comes as House Republicans push to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts with a "big, beautiful bill." If handled correctly, it's a good idea. But while the legislation aims to avoid tax hikes, it pairs modestly pro-growth provisions with a smorgasbord of costly special interest giveaways. Worse, it assumes we can afford yet another $3 trillion to $5 trillion in debt without serious consequences. That's the kind of magical thinking that spurred the credit downgrade.
Starting with Hamilton, American politicians long understood the importance of fiscal policy guided by the ethos of balanced budgets, low taxes, and steady debt reduction. Their vision, combined with a deep respect for contractual repayment and financial responsibility, made America a creditor nation.
Washington abandoned that honorable legacy in recent decades. U.S. national debt held by the public is racing toward $30 trillion, and the cost of servicing it is ballooning. Interest payments are now one of the fastest-growing parts of the budget—$1 trillion in 2026—crowding out core priorities and leaving us vulnerable to economic shocks. The Congressional Budget Office warns that even modest interest rate increases could lead to hundreds of billions of dollars in added annual costs. It's not a theoretical problem; it's a real, compounding threat.
Which brings us back to the downgrade. Historically, downgrades like those from S&P in 2011 or Fitch in 2023 haven't caused immediate crises, but they do raise borrowing costs and gradually erode investor confidence. The downgrades are not the problem but symptoms of a deeper illness: lack of credible fiscal discipline. Market participants aren't worried because Moody's wrote a negative report; they're worried because what Moody's wrote is true.
If our political class continues to ignore warnings, the market will do what rating agencies only hint at: impose real discipline through higher borrowing costs, weaker currency demand, and tighter credit conditions. Already, China and other countries have reduced holdings of U.S. Treasuries from 42 percent in 2019 to 30 percent today.
Meanwhile, the tax plan so far embodies Washington's worst habits. It makes only temporary the most important pro-growth provisions of the 2017 tax cuts—like full expensing for equipment and research and development—while rendering permanent a raft of unrelated policies catering to favored industries and constituencies. That's not tax reform; it's pork-barrel politics dressed up as populist economics.
Worse still, the bill's Republican supporters in the House justify it with the fantastical claim that it's fiscally responsible based on the notion that it will raise trillions in growth-generated revenue. Even the most optimistic models show the current bill barely moving the growth needle. The administration claims growth will be enormous once it deregulates and sells off assets, but these distinct policies take a long time to bear fruit.
What a missed opportunity. According to Tax Foundation experts, making just four cost-recovery provisions permanent—bonus depreciation, R&D expensing, full expensing for factories, and reforming the business-interest limitation—would more than double the tax bill's long-run growth benefits.
That's where legislators should be focused. Not on tax breaks for handpicked industries or energy credits for handpicked technologies—on structural reforms that maximize American investment, innovation, and capital formation. Even such pro-growth tax policy must be paired with real spending restraint, something we haven't seen in earnest since the 1990s. Otherwise, any gains from better tax policy will have red ink spilled all over them.
The lesson from Moody's, and from history, is that America cannot borrow its way to prosperity. That was former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's view in the 1920s, and it remains true today. Mellon quietly prepared for debt defaults by building budget surpluses, knowing that while international repayments might fail, American citizens still had to be paid. That was back when Treasury secretaries respected taxpayers.
Now, as then, we stand at a crossroads. Will we restore Hamiltonian principles of fiscal prudence, or continue down a path where downgrades become defaults and our creditors decide the terms of American fiscal policy? The next move belongs to Congress. Legislators can't say they weren't warned. If they fail the fiscal prudence test again, we'll all pay the price.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I don't know what it will take for politicians to tackle entitlements, but if they were actually serious about growing the economy to get out of debt, the only way possible is cut 90 or 99% of regulations. Zoning, building codes, safety regulations, CAFE restrictions, energy subsidies, minimum wages, occupational licensing, environmental, and of course tariffs and other trade regulations. They haven't got the guts for even 1% of it, let alone anything meaningful.
I saw some reports once, no references, don't remember where, that claimed economic growth since WW II would have doubled if it hadn't been for all the overregulation. Seems about right to me. Private people supposedly spend the equivalent of 3 million full time jobs, 6 billion hours a year, just doing their taxes, and that's personal time, not the accounts and others who they hire.
Think how much better the economy would be without needing 1500 hours of school just to cut hair for a living, or needing a bachelor's degree to run day care. Moms and grandmas have been taking care of children for a long long time; why does taking care of neighbors' kids for pay suddenly require a bachelor's?
Maybe they think they can depend on good ole inflation, but entitlements would go up too.
I wonder when and how the bubble's going to collapse.
It's not up to politicians to tackle entitlements. It's up to you and I. We the people. Blaming pols for being elected to do what we elect them to do is not how self governance works.
No shit Sherlock. Now do our actual government, where voters have almost no say in how the country is governed.
You're the problem. Stop whining into the ether. Either talk to your elected pol. Or talk to voters in your district - esp the ones who disagree with you and who might need persuading to your point of view.
Politicians concern themselves only with the next election so there is no way to make them care until it all falls apart and then they won't look at causes but for ways to shift blame.
The U.S. cannot borrow its way to prosperity... No shit, Sherlock!
The U.S. cannot tariff-tax its way to prosperity either!
The U.S. is run by drooling morons! Yes, by drooling morons of "boaf sides"!!!
Shit's ultimately the fault of moronic voters, who want to be told twat they want to hear, whether shit is true, or snot!
Of course not. They plan to print our way to prosperity.
We'll offer student and business loans to immigrants to entice them to come here and open taco trucks. Also, zero tariffs all around so more authoritarian regimes that don't have to put up with irritations like "Human Rights Abuses" can sell us cheap shit.
Printing money, selling street tacos, and buying cheap shit is our way to prosperity.
"Credible fiscal discipline" is no longer even possible under our system of government. It's not going to happen. The resolution of the "debt crisis" is going to be a total financial and economic collapse that will make the Great Depression look like a rainy day. I'm glad I'm not young.
I think they still have time for inflation to take care of the problem without a system collapse. It won't be pretty, there will be lots of bureaucratic hand-waving nonsense, but I think it is possible.
Compared to other countries, the United States is still the tallest midget, least dirty shirt and strongest horse at the glue factory.
We are a rich country and can afford all this. Or so I hear from progressives.
Best all get to work as millions on welfare are depending on you.
I am at work. And I get the impression that puts me in the minority here.
Like all the kool kids now say, "Work is optional".
It's comical to say "we stand at a crossroads."
We left the crossroads behind long ago, and we've been marching confidently down the road of more spending and more deficits, and we're not looking back.
Yeah, Thelma and Louise headed for the cliff is a more apt analogy than standing at the crossroads.
This downgrade should have happened 10 years ago. Perhaps it's unrealistic to expect fiscal responsibility from a government elected by a populace where 2/3 of the people live paycheck to paycheck. If the populace spends every dollar they get their hands on and then some, why wouldn't the government do the same. It's depressing.
What would happen if a politician proposed cutting spending?
Or even simply recycling the 2017 budget?
Look how well the efforts of DOGE were received. Not exactly ticker tape parades.
We can't afford parades any more...well....maybe just one more.
Doge offered exactly what we want. A circus to go along with free panem.
Or even 2019. At the very least that should have happened in 2021 or 2022 at the latest. I know I shouldn't be surprised, but what really gets me is how the supposed "emergency" spending just becomes the new baseline and nobody has much to say about it. If spending had gone back to pre-covid levels, even adjusted for inflation, we'd be damn close to a balanced budget.
Yup. 2008 bailouts became the new baseline. Happens after hurricanes. Even Ukraine funding has been incorporated into the baseline budget.
Back to a sequestration budget? Please that's just a grandstanders dream.
If the populace spends every dollar they get their hands on and then some, why wouldn't the government do the same. It's depressing.
Every corrupt, bankrupt socialist shithole and banana republic in history this side of Pol Pot (so far), and the American Globalist Uniparty is no better than any of it. One side mortgaged the shining city on the hill in defense of it while the other mortgaged it to lock people down, rape and neuter children, persecute its enemies, and enjoy cheap landscaping and ethnic food.
Democrats are willing to have the country go bankrupt in ten years. The Republicans are more fiscally responsible - they will have the country go bankrupt in fifteen years.
We're bankrupt now.
Yeah, but "we" own the bank.
We're Bear Stearns, now! Too big to fail; too broke to continue operating.
Again, Republicans will bankrupt the country in 15 yrs. in defense of the ideas of personal responsibility, individual sovereignty, and peaceful social order. Democrats will bankrupt it in 10 in opposition.
If only we had the most libertarian president ever who would slash the budget deficit by slashing federal programs. Maybe he could make an agency to do it and give it a nifty name, like Department Of Government Efficiency.
"That's the kind of magical thinking that spurred the credit downgrade."
I thought "deficits didn't matter" according to MMT? Supposedly as long as we print our own money and tax at will, we can just continue to borrow and run up deficits ad infinitum?