In September, 2026, U.S. President
Trump announced his intent to have the U.S. Government send $5000 to every American,
which would cost that government about a trillion dollars, in the event that
Trump’s Republican group retains control of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate in
2027 after the upcoming “midterm” election. The attempt to sway the electorates
to vote for Republican federal representatives and senators paid no heed to the
$40.2 trillion debt of the U.S. Government. Even characterizing the proposed
payments as “dividends” ignored the fact that the money would have to be paid
for, either by federal taxes, tariffs, or issuing more Treasury bonds (i.e., federal
debt). It was not as if the payments would go out from money that the
government already had. Such electioneering so misaligned from prudent fiscal
policy amid such a high public debt raises the question of whether a government
“of the People” can govern responsibly rather than merely in line with instant
gratification.
At his Republican “Midterm”
convention in September, 2026, President Trump said, “If we win, we’re going to
get you $5,000. So that’s it. Very simple.”[1]
Actually, it is not so simple. Republican candidates for Congressional office
had good reason to “sidestep the idea.”[2]
Firstly, financing the “dividends” by issuing additional Treasury bonds would
add $1 trillion to the extant $40.2 trillion federal debt, unless additional
taxes would be enacted to pay for the $5000 checks to every American. The yields
on Treasury bonds were already rising, making it more expensive for people and
businesses, as well as the U.S. Government, to borrow money, and putting
downward pressure on the stock market, making it more difficult for
corporations to raise capital. Although the Federal Reserve raising interest
rates and the relatively high inflation were factors behind the increasing bond
yields, the fact that the public was holding about $32 trillion of the U.S. Government’s
debt suggests that yields had to rise in order for so much debt to attract bond
holders, for as bond prices decline, bond yields rise. So although AP News
reported at the time that the rise in bond yields “has accelerated recently
because inflation has remained stubbornly high for years,” the need of the U.S.
Treasury department to attract investors as the amount of outstanding
Treasuries bloats should not be ignored.[3]
Even the media was slighting the economic headwind from the $40.2 trillion public
federal debt.
The problem of bloated public debt—not counting those of the member states!—had also been absent during the 2024 presidential election campaign “season” in 2023. Neither of the main candidates for the office meant to safeguard the viability of the U.S. Government needed to respond to concerns raised by the electorates in the member-states, which indicates that perhaps a government “by the people” can sidestep, or even be inherently inclined to obviate hard fiscal-policy choices even amid a public debt that is greater than the annual economic output. Neither Trump nor Harris were pressured by voters or journalists to address whether, or how, to reduce the massive debt-load; hence Trump, once elected, felt free of political constraint to urge Congress to extend his tax cuts rather than to raise taxes and dedicate the proceeds to reducing the debt. Even as California produced a balanced budget in 2026, the U.S. federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2026 reached about $2 trillion as of August, 2026 according to the Congressional Budget Office. That’s $2 trillion added to the U.S. Government’s debt in that fiscal year alone. The fiscal imbalance is starling, hence so too is the proposal of $5,000 for every American.
While it may be tempting to blame the
president exclusively, such blame in a government “by the People” ultimately accrues
to the citizenry itself. Jefferson and Adams agreed not on much, but that a
viable republic really needs an educated and virtuous citizenry was assumed by
both men, and thus this article of faith can be said to be nonpartisan, and
thus patriotic in nature. Virtuous people take heed of being too much in
debt as a instance of public irresponsibility, whereas profligate, selfish
people are happy to send the bill to future generations without heeding even
baleful economic indicators such as rising debt yields.
2. Ibid.
3. Stan Choe, “Wall Street Drifts Lower as Bond Yields Rise and Oil Prices Swing,” APnews.com, September 18, 2026.
