Editorial: Climbing toward $20 trillion

We heard a lot of talk during the conventions about how politicians on both sides of the aisle need to unite to address the nation’s vital issues. Noticeably absent from these pleas, however, was any mention of reining in the country’s debt.

While in election years past, debate over how to best slash the debt — the cumulative total of annual federal deficits — might be front and center, that conversation has been muted in the current campaign. That’s unfortunate.

According to a new long-term outlook from the Congressional Budget Office, America’s debt is on track to hit historic levels within 20 years, potentially ballooning to 141 percent of the size of the economy by 2046. That would be up 75 percent from today, and significantly above the previous high of 106 percent following World War II — a peak we could easily exceed by 2036.

“The prospect of such large debt poses substantial risks for the nation and presents policymakers with significant challenges,” the CBO noted in its report.

The CBO highlights that “discretionary” spending in numerous areas — including education, defense, research, cybersecurity, environmental protection and national parks — is slated to fall to 50-year lows. The fact that Americans are living longer and longer, however, means that in 30 years half of all government outlays will feed Social Security, Medicare and other health-care programs.

Interest payments on the nation’s debt loom large, as well.

Donald Trump has floated a debt buyback program and even restructuring debt. These are interesting proposals, although they carry the risk of triggering uncertainty in the markets, especially if interest rates rise. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton appears more intent on scoring cheap political points by tagging Mr. Trump as the “king of debt” for his business practices.

At the same time, the U.S. national debt clock spins toward $20 trillion.

In fact, the best way to combat the debt remains getting a handle on federal spending and addressing the long-term solvency and structural integrity of entitlement programs. This would be high on the agenda for a Republican Congress with a sympathetic president in the Oval Office.

Democrats have spent the past few years migrating so far to the left that an obscure Vermont socialist who honeymooned in the Soviet Union came within a whisker of winning the party’s presidential nomination. Can those who embrace fiscal sanity truly expect Mrs. Clinton and down-ticket Democrats to make any progress on this issue while at the same time they fall all over each other offering “free” college and other goodies to win votes?

Doubtful.