What political party has done more to increase the national debt
Executive summary
Democratic presidents have added more inflation-adjusted debt overall since 1913, though Democrats have also occupied the White House for more years in that period, and the national debt has risen steadily under both parties (Investopedia) [1]. The Treasury and independent analysts emphasize that debt growth reflects deficits, which depend on policy choices by presidents and Congress, economic cycles, emergencies and long-term program costs—factors that cut across party lines (U.S. Treasury; Congress Research Service) [2] [3].
1. Who “added” the debt — and why that question is tricky
As Investopedia reports, studies that attribute debt increases to a single party find Democratic presidents added more inflation‑adjusted debt overall, but that result is shaped by the fact Democrats have held the presidency more years since 1913 and by the method used to count years and adjust for inflation [1]. Debt accumulation is the sum of annual deficits; attributing the total to party labels ignores congressional control, economic recessions, emergency spending (wars, pandemics), and interest-rate movements—factors emphasized in Treasury and CBO discussions [2] [3].
2. Absolute levels vs. share of GDP: different lenses, different answers
The Pew Research Center and Treasury data show the scale of the problem: by mid‑2025 the debt exceeded $36 trillion to $38 trillion and was well over 100% of GDP, with debt-to-GDP offered as the preferred long-term comparison [4] [2]. Analysts differ on whether raw dollar increases or debt relative to GDP better measure fiscal responsibility; Investopedia’s inflation‑adjusted presidential comparison uses dollar measures while official agencies focus on deficits and debt-to‑GDP trajectories [1] [2].
3. Partisan patterns in specific eras
Historical spikes in debt often map to specific events rather than a single party’s long-term strategy: the 2017 tax cuts and COVID‑19 relief are cited as major drivers in recent years, and partisan control of Congress as well as the White House shaped those outcomes [5] [6]. Reuters and other analysts note the national debt has risen “steadily regardless of which party held sway in the White House and Congress,” indicating bipartisan responsibility across decades [7].
4. How Congress and the debt limit factor in
The Treasury notes Congress has acted repeatedly on the debt limit—78 times since 1960—including 49 actions under Republican presidents and 29 under Democratic presidents—showing routine, bipartisan accommodation to borrowing needs [8]. That pattern undercuts claims that only one party is responsible for permitting debt growth; raising or suspending the limit is a shared institutional response to prior deficits [8].
5. Political narratives and competing claims
Partisan actors frame the record differently: House Republican aides emphasize “record” spending under Democratic control of the 117th Congress, tying it to higher deficits and interest costs [9]. Independent commentators and outlets emphasize that both parties contributed to rising debt—one Substack writer bluntly says “Democrats and Republicans are to blame” and Investopedia highlights methodological caveats to single‑party blame [10] [1].
6. What the data-driven view shows
Official fiscal data explain mechanics: annual deficits add to national debt and are driven by spending choices (mandatory programs, defense, emergency relief) and revenue (tax policy), with interest payments now a materially larger driver of outlays as debt and rates rise [11] [4]. Visual and journalistic summaries in 2025 place the debt north of $36–38 trillion and stress that rising interest costs and mandatory program pressures make future trajectories highly sensitive to policy choices across parties [4] [12].
7. Bottom line for readers
Available reporting shows no single‑party monopoly on responsibility: Democratic presidents have, by some inflation‑adjusted calculations, added more debt overall, but that finding reflects longer Democratic tenure and methodological choices, while official sources and journalists document steady debt growth under both parties and repeated bipartisan action on the debt limit [1] [8] [7]. Any claim that one party “did more” requires clarity about the metric used—dollars vs. inflation‑adjusted dollars, years in office, debt-to‑GDP, or causal drivers like recessions and legislation—which the sources emphasize are determinative [1] [2] [3].
Limitations: this analysis relies on the provided reporting and datasets; available sources do not mention every possible study or the most recent post‑2025 academic work on partisan effects.