"A crisis is a terrible thing to waste"is a quote attributed to economist Paul Romer, and repeated by others in business and politics. And the budget crisis facing Gov. Ed Rendell and lawmakers in Harrisburg can be seen as a great opportunity to force state officials to get serious about cost control and wasteful or ineffective spending.

Through the first six years of his administration, Rendell and the General Assembly have increased state spending at a rate nearly double the rate of inflation at the same time they have billions of dollars of new debt. Such a fiscal track record is not sustainable, especially during a recession.

With the state feeling the effects of the global financial crisis, Rendell and state lawmakers should commit to a careful review of all state spending in search of waste, duplication and programs that should be ended or merged with other programs.

President Barack Obama has repeatedly promised a similar approach to federal spending, vowing to review the federal budget line by line — to justify all spending and end programs that are found to be ineffective or unjustified. Rendell should adopt the president's approach to budgeting.

Rendell already has instituted spending freezes. And he also has promised no broad-based tax increases to close the $2.3 billion budget shortfall that some lawmakers predict could hit $3 billion.

Most observers are expecting him to propose that some programs should be trimmed back or eliminated. Taxpayers should expect nothing less.

Facing an 8 percent budget gap, Rendell and GOPlawmakers should agree to an examination of all state spending. When visiting the Butler Eagle recently, state Reps. Daryl Metcalfe, R-12th, and Brian Ellis, R-11th, argued that there are plenty of opportunities for spending cuts in the state budget. Both lawmakers are part of a 15-member Republican task force that is examining the budget and plans to propose spending cuts to close the budget gap.

The seriousness of the budget crisis should bring Rendell and Democratic lawmakers to the same table, with the objective of honestly and openly examining all state spending. Ellis and Metcalfe promoted the idea of zero-based budgeting, through which all spending is justified — rather than the traditional budget process that just accepts all current spending as necessary, and then proposes increases to current levels.

In normal times, zero-based budgeting might be a hard sell because it is difficult, time consuming and, if effective, can lead to turf battles and disagreements over what constitutes justified spending or waste. But these are not normal times, and taxpayers should demand that state lawmakers and the governor justify all expenditures and expose programs that represent wasteful, ineffective or duplicative spending.

Household budgets and spending plans for most businesses already are undergoing such scrutiny. There is no reason to exempt government spending from the same critical analysis.

Granted, any significant cuts in spending will upset some group or constituency. But that is not an excuse to avoid zero-based budgeting.

Ellis and Metcalfe pointed to some budget relief that they characterized as "low-handing fruit," such as stripping $100 million or more from the slush funds controlled by legislative leaders in the General Assembly, and cutting — or eliminating — so-called walking around money (WAMs) awarded by lawmakers with little or no scrutiny. The staffing levels for lawmakers in Harrisburg is another area ripe for cuts. For example, why does it require 3,000 staffers to run the state House, when 2,000 handled the job 10 years ago? Staffing levels across the legislature are ripe for cutting, based on staffing for other state governments.

Funding for all departments of the state government should be subject to zero-based budgeting so every dollar spent is cost-justified.

But zero-based budgeting is not enough. It is not a cure-all for budget waste. There must be analysis of the effectiveness of spending, and that requires some form of benchmarking — to compare Pennsylvania state programs with those in other states or those run by nongovernmental programs.

Taxpayers should press their state lawmakers and Rendell to embrace zero-based budgeting as part of a larger effort to cut wasteful or unnecessary spending from the state budget. The current economic crisis is so severe that the status quo, in terms of spending and budgeting, is no longer acceptable.

It's up to Rendell and state lawmakers to demonstrate that they understand that this crisis requires a new approach when it comes to spending taxpayers' money.