Pennsylvania faces a budget deficit of $3.2 billion or more, and none of the options to achieve a constitutionally mandated balanced budget will be popular. The continuing economic slowdown has impacted tax receipts in Harrisburg, in much the same way that it has impacted most businesses and individual taxpayers.

But for some in government, the first reaction to reduced revenues is to raise taxes. There is a warped logic in proposing that to close the budget gap state government should extract higher taxes from individuals or businesses who are themselves experiencing reduced income.

Yet, increasing taxes is being talked about by elected leaders in Harrisburg. Gov. Ed Rendell has proposed some targeted taxes on tobacco products, health insurance premiums and natural gas extraction. But even those tax increases, if enacted, would not erase the budget deficit.

Senate Republicans have offered an alternative budget featuring broad spending cuts and no tax increases.

The legal deadline for a budget deal is June 30, but Rendell and the Legislature have failed in each year of his administration to forge a budget plan by the legal deadline.

The same lawmakers who found a way to pass themselves a pay raise in 2005 and quickly legalize slot machine gambling have proved themselves ineffective when it comes to passing a budget on time.

John Baer, a columnist with the Philadelphia Daily News, wrote about the revenue shortfall Monday, saying, "It's budget time here in the Land of Low Expectations."

Some officials are talking about increasing the state's personal income tax. Raising that tax a full percentage point, to 4.07 percent, would produce about $3 billion in additional revenue and essentially close the budget gap.

Some officials are suggesting something less than a one percentage point increase will finally be approved.

Baer, who expects to see a hike in the personal income tax, notes that somehow "families go year after year without increased income — and sometimes less — yet manage to make ends meet, while government spends more every year."

And the reason Baer sees a tax hike coming is because "it's easier than doing the work required to make cuts that don't harm the truly needy, or selling off assets such as the anachronistic State Store system, or giving back hundreds of millions of dollars in legislative slush funds."

He makes a good point.

The best solution would be to spread the pain in a combination of spending cuts and small, one-time tax hikes.

The most-expensive state legislature in the nation, which reportedly costs $100 million more a year to operate than New York State's legislature, should not escape cost-cutting pain. Pennsylvania lawmakers should have to manage with smaller staffs (now the largest in the nation), and the legislative slush funds of the four caucuses that have grown to total more than $200 million should be tapped for $150 million or more for the budget gap.

There should be spending cuts to be found in the state budget that do not harm the truly needy. And taxpayers should demand lawmakers find them.

Pennsylvania taxpayers also should remember that state lawmakers gave themselves an automatic raise again this year, which will take the sting out of any increase in their personal tax bill.

And Baur's suggestion of selling the State Store system should be planned for the next year or two when the economy improves.

Finally, since this year's budget deficit is being caused by the current recession, a temporary condition, any tax increases passed to balance the 2009-10 budget should be one-year tax hikes. The language of the tax bill should explicitly state that the tax hike is for one year only.

The recession is predicted to end by next year, but if tax revenues still are down at that point, another, presumably smaller tax hike can be approved by the General Assembly.

Under no circumstances should a permanent tax increase be approved. Once the recession ends and tax receipts increase, the state government will have a surplus of funds, which lawmakers and the governor will quickly find a way to spend.

The current recession should not be used as an excuse to permanently increase tax revenues coming to state government.