Last week’s alarming update regarding the United States’ publicly traded debt should serve as a loud warning bell—a call to action that cannot be ignored.

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the nation’s debt has surged to $31.27 trillion, overtaking the total gross domestic product (GDP), which stands at $31.22 trillion.

This situation represents a concerning 100.2% debt-to-GDP ratio.

The annual cost of servicing this debt now tops $1 trillion—a staggering figure represented by a one followed by twelve zeros.

Such a financial burden is what we are passing down to future generations.

How did we fall into this deep hole?

Start with the reality that the federal budgeting process is a farce and an abomination.

No rules, restraints or restrictions keep Congress from spending willy-nilly on everything from food stamps to day-care centers to health insurance to farm subsidies.

And both parties are in on the game: Republicans call themselves fiscal conservatives, but the results don’t support that label.

Republicans control the presidency, the House and the Senate — and they’re spending at record levels. 

Sorry, can’t blame that on the Democrats.

But the Democrats aren’t helping matters; their only solution is to soak the rich. 

Good luck with that: Federal tax receipts are already at an all-time high.

Clearly we don’t have a revenue problem. 

I’m reminded of Ronald Reagan’s quip when asked whether he would support a tax increase: “Never give an alcoholic another drink.”

We’re on a bipartisan spending spree, and we’re not paying the bills, just charging them to the world’s largest credit card — with no borrowing limit but a debt “ceiling” that keeps getting extended. 

This is called a “buy now, pay later” scheme, and we should have learned by now that those never turn out well.

Now Republicans are about to blow another hole in the budget by passing a $200 billion military “supplemental” spending bill — without any offsetting savings.

That should officially end the masquerade of Republican fiscal responsibility.

One of Congress’ few true anti-big-government voices, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, notes that if we had simply held spending since 2019 to the rate of inflation, we’d be close to a balanced budget this year. 

But spending exploded during the COVID-19 pandemic, and we never stopped the splurge.

Instead of draining out all the excessive COVID spending, we made it permanent.  

That’s why we need pay-as-you-go budgeting.

History proves it works.

Three times in the last 40 years, Congress agreed to impose controls on how much it can spend each year.

First came the 1986 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit caps, which required automatic across-the-board sequesters if the cap was violated. 

Then came the hard spending caps of the Clinton-Gingrich budget deal of 1995-96.

Finally, in 2011, the underrated Budget Control Act negotiated by then-Speaker John Boehner and President Barack Obama instituted hard “pay-as-you-go” ceilings on domestic and defense spending.

All three times spending fell as a share of GDP, and so did the deficit.

After the Clinton-Gingrich negotiations, we saw one of the largest federal spending reductions ever, and the only balanced budgets in half a century — with almost $500 billion in surpluses.

The economy and the stock market boomed. 

But the reforms never stuck.

Each time, a later Congress repealed the budget caps, and spending and red ink soared — such as when the Republicans idiotically blew off 2011’s hard spending caps to shower more money on the Pentagon.

Spending caps, when in effect, have held the growth of federal outlays to 2.7%, according to a new Brookings Institute study.

Without spending caps, we’ve had unsustainable 6.4% growth in the federal budget. 

So it’s obvious we need “pay as you go” spending caps — starting right now.

If Republicans want $200 billion more for defense, they must include across-the-board cuts of 5% to 10% to all other programs to pay for it.

The GOP’s own studies have found rampant waste, fraud, abuse and outright theft in federal programs — more than $1 trillion worth.

So this time we need to include within the cap out-of-control “entitlement” programs like Medicare, Medicaid, pensions, food stamps, day-care subsidies and the like.

Why not, for example, require retired millionaires to purchase their own health insurance?

A new study uncovered many cases of food-stamp recipients driving Ferraris and Porsches.

Just ending the fraud and overpayments in these programs would save $200 billion a year.

If Congress won’t even make these easy and commonsense reforms, our debt burden will continue to soar.

And our future prosperity will be at great risk.

Stephen Moore is co-founder of Unleash Prosperity and is a senior fellow at America First Policy Institute. 

Blake Lively made a stunning comeback to the Met Gala 2026 red carpet on Monday, marking a dramatic return just hours after resolving her high-profile legal dispute with Justin Baldoni.

The 38-year-old actress attended the prestigious event solo, noticeably without her husband Ryan Reynolds. She made a bold statement with a striking Versace ensemble, embracing the full theatrical flair of the occasion.

Her appearance followed the resolution of a legal battle with Baldoni’s production company, Wayfarer Studios, and his PR firm. The dispute revolved around allegations of retaliation and contract breaches linked to their 2024 film, “It Ends With Us.”

In a joint statement released on the same day, both parties expressed that the film remains a “source of pride” for everyone involved in its creation. They highlighted the film’s dedication to raising awareness about domestic violence survivors.

“We acknowledge the process posed challenges, and we recognize that the concerns raised by Ms. Lively deserved to be heard. We are committed to maintaining workplaces free from improprieties and unproductive environments,” the statement concluded.

The statement did not include an apology from either party, who have been locked in a messy court battle since December 2024, when Lively first launched her multimillion-dollar suit.

Blake Lively made a bombshell return to the Met Gala 2026 red carpet on Monday, just hours after finally settling her explosive Justin Baldoni legal battle

The actress, 38, looked giddy as she returned to the iconic steps in the wake of the lawsuit drama

Instead, Baldoni and Lively’s teams said it was their ‘sincere hope that this brings closure and allows all involved to move forward constructively and in peace, including a respectful environment online.’ 

Wayfarer, It Ends With Us Movie LLC, and The Agency Group (TAG PR) are said to be ecstatic at the way in which this matter was resolved.

Lively gave no hint of the off-screen drama at the Met Gala, appearing completely unbothered as she stepped out in a show-stopping archival Atelier Versace gown from the brand’s Spring 2006 collection.

The look was finished with a sweeping 13ft train that trailed behind her.

Its draped bodice hugged her figure and was embellished with delicate gemstones in soft shades of powder pink, yellow, coral, peach and lilac.

Lively has become a regular presence at the Met Gala over the years, often opting for bold Versace looks. 

In 2022, she wore a gown inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which transformed on the carpet to reveal a copper-toned train. 

She also attended in 2018 in a red-and-gold Versace design for the Heavenly Bodies theme.

Perhaps it was her long-standing Met Gala presence that brought her back to the famous stairs on Monday, despite the fact that her legal battle had wrapped up just hours earlier. 

Lively gave no hint of the off-screen drama, appearing completely unbothered as she stepped out in a show-stopping archival Atelier Versace gown from the brand’s Spring 2006 collection

Its draped bodice hugged her figure and was embellished with delicate gemstones in soft shades of powder pink, yellow, coral, peach and lilac

Leaning into full red carpet theatrics, the look was finished with a sweeping 13ft train

The actress attended the event solo without her husband, Ryan Reynolds

The surprise settlement comes after a judge last month sensationally gutted Lively’s case, dismissing ten of her 13 claims, including all of the sexual harassment allegations. 

The trial was still due to kick off on May 18, but covering only three counts: retaliation, aiding and abetting retaliation, and breach of an agreement, known as the Contract Rider.

The ruling also meant that Baldoni was no longer a named defendant in the case.

Instead, Wayfarer, along with the company he set up to make It Ends With Us and TAG PR, was due to go on trial for the alleged ‘smear campaign’ against Lively. It denied the claims.

Baldoni and Wayfarer had countersued Lively and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds, for $400 million, accusing them of defamation and extortion. The judge dismissed the claims last June.

In a pre-trial hearing last week, Lively’s attorneys argued that the actress had lost tens of millions in endorsements on top of nine-figure hits to her earnings and profits – figures Wayfarer’s side has dismissed as wildly inflated. 

Wayfarer’s attorneys denied having any responsibility for her losses and claimed Lively was already a ‘bully’ with a history of failed business ventures.

The actress, 38, finally reached a settlement with Baldoni’s production company, Wayfarer Studios, as well as his PR agency, over claims of retaliation and breach of contract relating to 2024 movie It Ends With Us

The company’s lawyer, Amir Kaltgrad, also claimed the calculations from Lively’s experts about her lost earnings were speculative.

He told the court the estimated figures were ‘pie in the sky,’ broken down as: $143 million in lost profits, $132 million in lost earnings and several million more for lost endorsements. 

The attorney argued her team made an ‘unrealistic assumption’ about how much work Lively would get in the years after It Ends With Us.

Kaltgrad noted that Lively only earned $21 million from four film projects in the eight years leading up to the release of the 2024 movie.

He also argued that in one case, it was Lively’s business decisions that caused her economic harm, not the firm.

He claimed her non-alcoholic drinks line Betty Buzz ‘did not succeed for nothing to do with the defendants,’ pointing out that that her own accountant, Jeffrey Kinrich, said as much.

Lively herself admitted that the brand was failing in a previous court filing. 

Another of Wayfarer’s lawyers, Fabien Manohar Thayamballi, disputed the claim from Lively that online comments calling her a bully were solely the result of digital manipulation.

The attorney noted Lively had been an aggressor herself, pointing to when she apparently mocked Kate Middleton in March 2024 after the Princess of Wales posted a family photograph that was later revealed to have been digitally altered, sparking global headlines.

The multimillion-dollar lawsuits painted a portrait of a troubled production, with an A-list star asserting herself over a relatively inexperienced director who allegedly struggled to push back on her growing demands.

At the center of the case were several incidents Lively claimed amounted to sexual harassment, including: Baldoni allegedly adding unscripted sexual moments, one of his personal friends playing a doctor during a birthing scene on an insufficiently closed set, and the movie’s producer, Jamey Heath, allegedly barging into her trailer while she was topless. These allegations were thrown out.

Filming began in 2023 and then paused for several months due to the Hollywood writers’ strike.

Lively’s team alleged that she lost tens of millions in endorsements after a smear campaign following It Ends With Us. This was denied by Wayfarer Studios, owned by Baldoni

Baldoni and Wayfarer had countersued Lively and Reynolds for $400 million, accusing them of defamation and extortion. The judge dismissed these claims last year

But before production resumed, Baldoni was forced to attend a meeting at Lively’s house in New York, where he claimed Reynolds ‘berated’ him for mistreating his wife.

Among the others who were present were Lively’s now former best friend, Taylor Swift, and Hugh Jackman, as Reynolds tore into Baldoni for ‘fat shaming’ his wife by asking her personal trainer about her weight.

Baldoni ultimately signed a 17-point agreement presented to him in order to get the film back on track – later claiming he did so under duress.

Explosive case filings later offered a glimpse into Lively’s relationship with Swift, whom she infamously referred to as one of her ‘dragons’, alongside Reynolds. 

Baldoni argued that the threat of having two such huge superstars turn on him was the reason he ceded so much control to Lively.

At times, the pair’s friendship did appear unwavering. Text messages submitted as evidence show Swift texted Lively on December 21, 2024, saying: ‘You won. You did it.’ 

She then sent the actress a link to a news report about talent agency WME dropping Baldoni, citing Lively’s filing with the California Civil Rights Department in which she accused him and others of sexual harassment and a ‘coordinated effort to destroy her reputation.’ 

Swift told Lively: ‘You you f***ing helped so many people who won’t have to go through this ever again.’ 

In a reference to the negative publicity towards Lively during the promotion of the film, Swift said: ‘Never has a cancellation been reversed so fast.

‘You guys don’t understand how rare this is. To have proof and to take the perfect steps to bring that truth to light.’ 

Lively replied: ‘Like. My. God’. Another message read: ‘I love you so much. I would not be ok through any of this if it weren’t for you.’ 

But just weeks earlier, Lively had sensed something was off and on December 4 2024, shortly before the end of Swift’s Eras Tour, she asked her: ‘Is everything OK?

‘I felt like a bad friend lately because I was such a sad sack who only talked about my own s*** for months’.

Swift replied that Lively was ‘not wrong, but it’s also not a big deal’.

Speaking outside court last week, Lively’s lawyer Sigrid McCawley had poured cold water on the prospect of any last-minute settlement.

‘Blake’s been ready for this trial, it’s a moment she’s been waiting for a long time, to have her voice heard in this court,’ she said.

‘She’s feeling really good…she’s finally at a point where she will be able to tell her side.’

It Ends With Us, an adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s bestselling 2016 novel that begins as a romance but takes a dark turn into domestic violence, was released in August 2024, exceeding box office expectations with a $50 million debut. 

An Ohio daycare worker has been sentenced to several years in prison for allegedly terrorizing children in her care. This includes accusations of repeatedly binding a 2-year-old with tape and leaving the child face down under a blanket.

Katelyn Ann Strohacker, who worked at Over the Rainbow Children’s Center in Licking County, faced 31 charges, including kidnapping and child endangerment. She received an 8 to 12-year prison sentence after pleading no contest, as reported by Fox News Digital.

The investigation began in August 2025 when a concerned parent reported the mistreatment of their toddler.

This is a view of Over the Rainbow Children’s Center located in Licking County, Ohio. (Google Maps)

Court documents reveal that Strohacker admitted to using painter’s tape to bind the child on multiple occasions. In one case, the child remained restrained until a coworker stepped in to stop the abuse.

Investigators later reviewed surveillance footage and found the abuse was not isolated. Authorities say video showed Strohacker repeatedly abusing at least eight children over several weeks, including pushing, kicking and yanking toddlers.

In one incident, prosecutors say she purposely shut a child’s finger in a cabinet door.

“The defendant frequently shoved or yanked [the child], including one incident on July 11, 2025, where the defendant purposely shut the victim’s finger in a cabinet door,” as noted in court documents.

Officials say the impact on the children was severe. Several victims suffered night terrors, separation anxiety and behavioral issues.

Investigators noted Strohacker had worked at the daycare for more than three years and had received “all necessary training and continuing education.”

During Friday’s sentencing hearing, emotional parents spoke out about the lasting trauma.

One mother said she hopes Strohacker is “never allowed to be alone with children ever again,” according to WSYX.

“May God have mercy on your soul, but I can’t — because we pray he doesn’t,” the mother said.

Another parent described the toll on her young daughter.

“For our daughter, she’s been trapped in a cycle of sleep aggression and night terrors at two years old,” the parent said.

Police sirens are pictured in this undated photo. (iStock)

Strohacker, who was facing a possible 87 to 92.5 years behind bars, remained largely silent in court, responding only to the judge’s questions, according to KENS5.

Her attorney delivered a brief apology to the victims’ families on her behalf.

The Licking County Sheriff’s Office could not immediately be reached by Fox News Digital for comment.

In a dramatic turn of events on Below Deck Down Under, Deck/Stew Mike Durrant’s tenure came to an abrupt end when Captain Jason Chambers decided to part ways with him. The tipping point was reached when Durrant defiantly responded to Chief Stew Daisy Kelliher’s directive to work until 9 PM, after he had stirred up unnecessary conflict between Stews Jenna Woudberg and Alesia Harris. Reflecting on the incident, Durrant acknowledged, “When I was disrespectful to Daisy in the guest cabin, she had to let me go. She had to put aside our friendship because I took things too far.”

Kelliher, faced with no option, reported Durrant’s insubordination to Chambers. Given Durrant’s previously noted lackluster performance, Chambers had little choice but to terminate his employment. Durrant expressed his respect for Chambers, saying, “Captain Jason is probably one of the best people I’ve ever worked with. He seemed more disappointed than upset to fire me. It was a bit scary to hear him talk to me the way he did.” In a bid to learn from the experience, Durrant took the unusual step of watching the season back, stating, “I understand where I went wrong. I can only learn from this experience and move forward.”

Fortunately, Durrant managed to mend fences with Kelliher after the show. “I reached out to Daisy and apologized,” he shared, adding that their friendship is now on “really good terms.” Despite his antics during the season with Woudberg and Harris, Durrant insists that his behavior, including the playful demand to be called a “HOD” or head of department, was merely “a bit of banter.” “I don’t want to fall out with anyone,” he stated sincerely.

During a Zoom interview with Decider, Durrant opened up about his dismissal from the show, the lessons he learned, and a budding friendship with a fellow alum from the Below Deck franchise.

DECIDER: Mike, I was so sorry to see you go! How do you look back on your final days on the Katina?

MIKE DURRANT: I understand where I went wrong. My work ethic was probably the number one the issue,and I know I fucked up. I put a lot of pressure on Daisy. She was already having other problems with the galley. I should have been helping her out. Not only did I not work hard, I had a bad attitude as well [laughs]. I do want to take accountability for upsetting people and for letting people down. Though, I can only learn from this experience and move forward.

It seems like you were much better suited to working on deck. 

I liked entertaining the guests, but I didn’t enjoy working in the interior. I should have made the beds, polished the cutlery, cleanedthe board, and just supported Daisy and the other girls without complaining. When I got fired from previous jobs, I never had the chance to reflect on what went wrong. Watching the show back, I can see exactly where I went wrong. I know where my improvements need to be made. 

Have you spoken to Daisy since you left the charter season? I see she’s been posting pictures of you two on Instagram…

I reached out to Daisy after the show and  apologized. I said, “Daisy, I’m really sorry for the lack of work ethic. I’m sorry for my behavior.” Daisy and I actually got on well during the season when we weren’t working. You’ve seen some of the pictures that Daisy posted. 

When I was disrespectful to Daisy in the guest cabin, she had to let me go. To be a good head of department, she had to put aside our friendship because I took things too far. I probably took advantage of our relationship and thought I could say whatever I wanted. Since I apologized and took accountability, Daisy and I are on really good terms now. That’s how I want it to be. I don’t want to fall out with anyone. 

I have to ask: what is like to get fired by Captain Jason?

Captain Jason is probably one of the best people I’ve ever worked with. He seemed more disappointed than upset to fire me. It was a bit scary to hear him talk to me the way he did. Jason knew that I could have worked harder.  If there’s someone not putting the effort in and letting the team down, then, of course, he has to make changes.

He made the right decision.It was really upsetting for me to let someone like Jason down, who is such a great guy. I regret disappointing him most of all.

He also said to you: “there is a toxicity on board and you’re the source.” Do you think that was fair?

Everybody had their own drama going on. The only person who didn’t have drama was Betul [Yazici]. But I was the only person having issues who wasn’t doing their job [laughs]. I understood where Jason was coming from. You’re living in  close proximity to other people who are going through their own struggles. Everyone has to carry their weight and help their team along. I wasn’t doing that. I should have just worked a little bit harder. 

I personally thought your naming yourself the “HOD of the deck/stew apartment” was funny, but you kept on doing it. Do you regret hammering that joke into the ground?

Not at all [laughs]. It was a bit of a joke, but I didn’t expect it to get people as wound up as it did. I thought it was a bit of banter. It’s a bit of British humor. Ellie [Dubaich] and Alesia were laughing. [Lead Deckhand] Eddy [Hounsell] was laughing his head off. It was just Jenna who didn’t take it very well, so that’s why I took it as far as I did. 

Eddy was my boy. I wanted to protect him, and I could see how Jenna was playing both Eddie and [Chef] Ben [Robinson]. Eddy wears his heart on his sleeve and was really upset when she ended things with him. In my mind, I was like, “Jenna, you’ve upset my boy so I’m going to continue to mess with you.” Was it the right thing to do? Probably not. Did I take it too far? Of course I did [laughs]. At the end of the day, I don’t regret doing it. I thought it was iconic, to be honest.

You recently linked up with Below Deck Mediterranean‘s Joe Bradley in Spain and you posted a pic of you two together. How did that meetup come to be?

So, I live in Majorca full time. Joe was coming to Mallorca to take a course. He’s wanting to progress in his yachting career as well. He watches the show and reached out to hang out. I said, “Joe, I would absolutely love to meet up .” Joe’s been in the industry for a long time and has a lot of deck experience. When we finally met up, we just clicked. I had all of this brotherly energy towards him immediately. I knew he and I were going to have a lot of fun together. 

What kind of trouble did you two get up to in Spain?

You know, we kept things casual [laughs]. We didn’t go too mental. It was a few bottles of wine…and I can’t remember what happened after that [laughs]. 

New episodes Below Deck Down Under air Mondays at 8/7c on Bravo