As the deficit continues to dominate Beltway discourse, much has been made recently of sacrifice. When it comes to closing the massive budget deficits that plague state and federal governments, Democrats and Republicans alike preach the virtues of austerity. From California to New York, governors have used budget deficits to justify unprecedented cuts in government services, public employee unions, pension programs for said public employees, and other measures aimed at reducing crippling deficits. Even under Democratic governors like New York's Andrew Cuomo, citizens have seen education budgets gutted, aid to cities reduced, and massive lay offs, all in the name of fiscal solvency.

At the federal level, House Republicans constantly explicate on the need to reduce the federal deficit, going so far as to turn Medicare int a voucher program and advocate for billions of dollars in cuts to discretionary spending. Everything from financial assitance for college to heating subsidies for the needy were put on the chopping block in the plan that Representative Paul Ryan and his fellow Republicans passed last week. President Obama and the Democrats, though recently staking out positions against Representative Ryan's plan, have largely succumbed to this discourse of austerity, so much so that the President is forced to describe tax increases (in terms that put Orwell to shame) as reductions in spending.

As the nation's deficit troubles stand now, it is difficult to argue with the idea that governments (state governments especially) need to outline long-term plans that reduce spending while allowing government to better provide essential services. However, we should never lose sight of the fact that any sacrifice made in the name of fiscal solvency must not be borne on the backs of the middle and poor classes alone. That type of austerity is not only morally questionable, but economically dangerous. Unfortunately, that is exactly what leaders of both parties are offering us today.

Consider the example of Governor Cuomo in New York. His budget, which passed earlier this month, makes huge strides towards reducing New York State's deficit. It will supposedly reduce spending by two percent, the first decrease in state spending the State has seen in fifteen years. However, this accomplishment is regressive at heart, and lays much of the burden of austerity upon the middle class. $1.3 billion has been removed from education spending, with poorer school districts bearing much of the pain. State workers are being subjected to wage freezes and layoffs. Medicaid is taking a $5 billion dollar cut.

Strong cases can be made for each of those measures, especially the Medicaid cut, which largely follows the recommendations of the Medicaid Redesign Team. It is inexcusable, however, that Governor Cuomo and the legislature shielded the most fortunate New Yorkers from sacrifice. New York's tax surcharge on individuals making more than $200,000 expires at the end of the year, and Governor Cuomo did not advocate for its renewal. This surcharge is not unreasonable, and would help ease the sacrifices being made by the middle class. While the Governor has vowed not to approve any new taxes, the surcharge is a sensible policy that will lift some of the burden that the State is placing upon its most vulnerable citizens. Besides, it makes no sense that the Governor is willing to countenance tax decreases in the face of a staggering deficit. When you factor in the probability that these austerity measures may further decrease tax revenue  by placing additional financial burdens on the middle class (an outcome we are currently witnessing in David Cameron's British experiment with "expansionary austerity"), the Governor's choice is both morally and economically problematic.

This unfair and counter-productive path is being taken in many states, perhaps most notably in Wisconsin, which was the site of a showdown between Republican Governor Scott Walker and public employee unions. One governor, though, provides us with a glimpse of how our leaders can balance the well-being of the middle class and the need to reduce the deficit by spreading fiscal sacrifice more equally. In California, Governor Jerry Brown is in the midst of a fight to extend tax increases set to expire in July. He understands that California's deficit cannot be eliminated through spending cuts alone, not only because it places an undue burden on the middle and poor classes, but also because it is bad for the state's economy. He is attempting to put the tax increases up for a vote in a June special election.

Governor Brown has not been afraid to stand against the political tide that favors spending cuts and vilifies tax increases. Rather, after talks with California Republicans broke down, he took his message to the state's voters. His efforts have paid off - sixty percent of Californians now believe that tax increases should be used to attack the deficit. Even more revealing is the fact that support for an all cuts approach to the deficit falls to twenty-five percent when voters are informed that further cuts must be forced upon school systems that have already been put under the knife.

This change of opinion in California shows that, with strong leadership, voters can be made to understand that cuts alone will not reduce the deficit or benefit the majority of citizens. Instead, sacrifice must be borne by all Americans - the wealthy, the middle class, and the poor. Hopefully other leaders are paying attention to Governor Brown's sensible approach to the deficit.