The state of California , home to the movie industry, is serving up a different form of entertainment these days.  A badly conceived recall statute, an unpopular governor, and a fiscal crisis of unprecedented proportions have produced the near-comical, but distressingly real possibility that as little as 15 percent of the electorate could decide the next governor of the biggest state in the country.

But as the distracting show of personalities and drama unfolding out west is served up to us as just one more "big story" in the news, the opportunity to learn its basic lesson is being lost.  While the fingers of blame point in all directions -- to the governor, to Enron, or to the tax-happy legislature -- very little thought is being given to fixing the fundamental problem that produced the crisis in the first place.

That problem is state government finance, and if you think it is confined to the state of California , you are mistaken.  Nearly every state in the country -- including Indiana -- is confronted with a budget-busting situation every time the economy takes a dip.  That is when demands for social services and other commitments rise just as the ability to pay -- from state tax receipts, mostly -- takes a dive.  It leaves cash-strapped states across the country with nothing but bad choices, from raising taxes on faltering businesses and consumers, to cutting vital services at the very time they are needed most.

The "solution" to this dilemma practiced to date has been simple, yet ineffective.  We blame our leaders for the problem.  For some leaders, that's reason enough to kick the can down the road and let some future leader take the heat.  That's effectively what has happened in the state of Indiana , where state employee retirement funds have been tapped, higher education and other payments have been pushed forward, and other devices have been used to give the budget the illusion of balance.

We blame our leaders because they do not act responsibly, by limiting commitments for new expenditures and saving enough money when times are good.  We take those steps ourselves, in our personal finances, because we know that we will bear the consequences if we do otherwise.

But it is high time that we recognize that popularly elected governments will never, of their own accord, act this way.  The fiscal integrity of the state, and the leadership's own political and economic well-being, are two entirely separate things.  There was no shortage of plans for spending the state's budget surplus, when we had it.  But how many have stepped forward with specific ideas for how to get us out of the hole?

A better solution is staring us in the face, if we would only take the time to recognize it.  After all, it is the balanced budget mandate written into the constitutions of states like Indianathat forces them to step up to the plate and recognize the problem in the first place.  Those mandates were a reaction to the crises of an earlier era, when states used public monies to pursue risky adventures in railroads and real estate that produced disastrous results.

A constitutional amendment to set money aside for bad times?  It would have to crafted with care, clearly.  To be effective, it would impose real limits on spending that would doubtless be portrayed as disastrous by the interests involved.  Yet those limits would impose a sorely needed discipline on our elected leaders, and force them to solve fiscal problems before they blow up into crises for future leaders to solve.

We don't have to wait for the recall election, or any other election, to get started on making this happen inIndiana .  The beautiful thing about our federal system of government is that states like us are free to try ideas out on our own.  And a state that doesn't ask its recession-plagued taxpayers to ante up more tax money when they can least afford it would be a better place to live and run a business.