Ky Holland August 16, 2026

Marketplace offers a sobering milestone: federal debt held by the public is now larger than a full year of U.S. economic output. See This year’s budget deficit has almost reached $2 trillion. It’s not over yet.

Is there really a fiscal philosophy—from the social left to the conservative right—that says persistent deficit spending during relatively prosperous times should be our long-term plan?

I have no objection to borrowing during a crisis, recession, war, or for genuinely transformative investments that build future productive capacity. Families, businesses and governments all sometimes borrow to get through extraordinary circumstances or invest in something that creates lasting value.

But borrowing should serve a purpose. Over the long run, the objective ought to be building prosperity and assets for the next generation—not simply passing them a larger pile of debt.

That question feels particularly relevant in Alaska.

We have spent years talking about our “fiscal cliff” while repeatedly using savings and the Permanent Fund to bridge the difference between the public services Alaskans expect and the recurring revenues we are willing to collect. That may buy time, but it isn’t a long-term fiscal strategy.

At some point, whether in Washington or Juneau, fiscal responsibility requires looking at both sides of the ledger: what we spend, what we invest in, what revenues we collect, and whether today’s choices leave the next generation stronger.

And perhaps, only half joking, elected officials should have a little more skin in the game. Maybe the base salary is the federal poverty-level income for their home community—and the rest is a performance bonus when we demonstrate sustainable fiscal management and economic growth.

That might focus the conversation.

Ky