Population growth shouldn't necessarily result in debt. Presumably, the revenue base should also increase. I'm sure Texas has at least as bad if not a worse problem with Illegal Border Crossers as we have here in California so it stands to reason that's part of the problem.
But it comes back to where the spending originates. Obviously, Federal spending originates in The House which has been dominated by RATS over the last 5 years or so. And it's been in the last 5 years that the debt has gotten out of hand.
I'm just curious as to where the spending originates in Texas, legislatively speaking, and who has been running the Texas legislature over the last few years as compared to the last 10.
Unfunded Mandates.
Sure it will. With the growth comes more necessary buildings and other long-term investments. Additional schools, hospitals, roads, and other infrastructure is necessary. Such debt is not a sign of overspending.
There is both "good debt" and "bad debt". Incurring debt to provide services for a growing population is not in and of itself wrong. The problem with the federal debt is there is no corresponding healthy growth in the economy or infrastructure (ie dams, roads, ports, hospitals, etc) that justifies going further into debt. And unlike Texas, the Federal gov't has pretty much tapped out their potential income sources. Unlike Texas which gets by without income taxes.