None of these big swings between administrations had much to do with policy:

Clinton inherited the end of the Cold War and resulting “peace dividend”.

Obama inherited a Federal government already spending hundreds of billions to address the GFC.

Similarly, Biden inherited a Covid recovery budget spending an additional trillion or so.

And so much of it has to do with the influence of The Heritage Foundation.

When you break it up that way, there have been several fiscally conservative congresses + good presidency combos, most notably under Clinton where they reformed welfare, increased taxes and managed to get a budget surplus one year. The formula seems to be slim Democratic Party majorities in Congress with a Democrat president.

So yes it’s rare but good governance + rising tides can make a difference.

Clinton changed a 300b deficit into a 100b surplus. Obama reduced it from 1.4t to 500b.

Biden also slashed it but that’s a little unfair due to covid.

The treasury announces it wants to sell $ 25B of 30Y bonds.

Then investors submit offers saying in effect how much yield they demand to buy them.

Then the treasury fills bids from the lowest yield upwards in tranches.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/econographics/are-risi...

> Several factors have driven the rise in bond yields, including higher inflation expectations amid elevated energy prices following the Iran war and uncertainty surrounding a new Federal Reserve Chair. But the more fundamental concern is the US fiscal position: persistently high budget deficits have reached 6 percent of GDP, while government debt now exceeds the size of the US economy.

> In Fiscal Year 2026, which ends in September, the US Treasury is expected to issue around $2 trillion of securities on a net basis. Gross issuance, meanwhile, could reach a staggering $20 trillion according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association. That gap reflects the sheer volume of debt that needs to be rolled over, much of it resulting from the Treasury’s decision under former Secretary Janet Yellen to favor shorter maturities when rates were lower and curves were upward sloping.

> US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been attentive to the resulting borrowing costs and their impact on the budget deficit, which is why the Treasury has sought to limit pressure on the US bond market from foreign central banks that need dollars. During a recent joint FX market intervention with Japan, the Treasury sold euros for yen rather than dollars, avoiding transactions that would have required selling Treasuries. It has also asked the Fed to raise the limit on its Foreign and International Monetary Authorities repo facility, allowing the Bank of Japan and other foreign central banks to borrow short-term dollars against Treasuries rather than sell them in the open market, which could put further upward pressure on yields.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-08-13/us-braces...

> “Investors are being asked to absorb a growing supply of government debt globally at a time when deficits remain large, inflation uncertainty persists” and the Federal Reserve is no longer a major buyer, said Michal Stanczyk, portfolio manager for the global fixed income team at Allspring Global Investments.

> “If investors continue demanding greater compensation for inflation and fiscal risks, long-term yields could move higher and away from 5% even if Treasury auctions remain well covered,” he said.

then in steps kevin warsh... historical backdrop: warsh resigned from the fed in 2011 because the fed owned too many assets. since then the fed bought 4 trillion more more than doubling the size of the fed balance sheet

warsh wants to shrink the balance sheet. only way to do that is to buy less treasuries, but the only reason 30 year mortgage isn't >15% is because the fed is the biggest buyer of long dated treasuries and mortgage backed securities (as in MBS i.e. the paper not the prince) since 2009...

so if warsh gets what he wants the long end is guaranteed to spike

then you add in the executive branch trying to to re-engineer the current account balance w the mar-a-lago accord and the correct reaction is not "wow rates are high" its "wow its kind of amazing rates are as low as they are in the long end", especially with the private markets gulping down as much gpu collateralized debt as it can without dislocating a jaw...

It's objectively not–that's what CDS measure.

> higher inflation expectations

Not reflected in the data [1].

We can reasonably debate if investors should treat the U.S. as a riskier credit. But these auctions, CDS data and other funding rates for high-quality non-U.S. dollar-denominated credits (e.g. Saudi Arabia's dollar-denominated debt [2]) do not show what the article implies they do.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T10YIE

[2] https://live.deutsche-boerse.com/bond/xs2747599509-saudi-ara...