Holding the Democrats accountable

The Economist's New York blogger has it exactly right (emphasis mine):

AT PRESENT there is a general consensus that government spending needs to rise in order to make up for the shortfall in demand from American consumers. A great deal of federal money also needs to be put toward rescuing the financial system. Thus, even this magazine has endorsed much of Barack Obama's expansive economic agenda. But at some point in the future the economy will stabilise, private spending will once again be counted on to spur growth, and a more restrained government should return. At that point, will the Democrats in power (assuming they're still in power) be able to turn off the tap?

Jon Henke of The Next Right suggests how we might measure the Democrats' seriousness about long-term fiscal responsibility and deficit reduction.

Watch how Obama funds programs that are not successful, or that do not have clear metrics for success/failure. Recall a point that Obama made in his inaugural address.

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works ... Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end.

Here's my prediction: programs that Democratic groups are inclined to like will almost never end. They will be given additional funding. For those programs, the answer will almost never be "no".

Therein lies the fear of every centrist now supporting Mr Obama. The Republicans, of course, were no better in managing the budget. But should the president fail to make a dent in the deficit by 2012, the opposition will have an issue to run on. Sensing this, Mr Henke puts his party on notice:

We can't dig our way out of this fiscal hole by "cutting waste". We certainly can't afford any significant tax cuts at this point. Proposals that are not politically viable are not "serious"; they are grandstanding for the base.