The economy is stalling and Wall Street bonuses are going to be much lower than originally expected - which means fiscal trouble for New York City. Mayor Bloomberg is taking the issue head-on, but there will certainly be some difficult decisions to be made in the near future regarding the City's future spending plans. 

I'm cautiously optimistic that Mayor Bloomberg and the City Council can close the $2.3B gap this year with reasonable spending cuts, but I'm not so confident about future budget gaps, which will be left to the next mayor and are estimated at over $5B in 2011 and 2012.

It is rare that a politician articulates a position that is exactly in line with my own - but Mayor Bloomberg did just that when he spoke to the UK Conservative Party in September 2007. While a statement on fiscal policy is always relevant, given our current situation, this one seems even more relevant today.

"Being a fiscal conservative is not about slashing programs that help the poor, or improve health care, or ensure a social safety net. It's about insisting services are provided efficiently, get to only the people that need them, and achieve the desired results. Fiscal conservatives have hearts too - but we also insist on using our brains, and that means demanding results and holding government accountable for producing them. To me, fiscal conservatism means balancing budgets - not running deficits that the next generation can't afford. It means improving the efficiency of delivering services by finding innovative ways to do more with less. It means cutting taxes when possible and prudent to do so, raising them overall only when necessary to balance the budget, and only in combination with spending cuts. It means when you run a surplus, you save it; you don't squander it. And most importantly, being a fiscal conservative means preparing for the inevitable economic downturns - and by all indications, we've got one coming."

Mayor Michael Bloomberg speaking to the UK Conservative Party - September 2007

The most important point to me is the acknowledgment that we should cut taxes whenever possible, but there are some times when raising taxes actually is the prudent thing to do - especially when it means balancing the budget. Many on the Right want to lower taxes at all costs, saying the market will always take care of everything. Many on the Left want to raise taxes and increase the size of government, without looking for a more efficient market solution to some problems. As is often the case, I think the answer is somewhere in the reasonable middle. 

This is a position full of nuance that is difficult for any politician to make, so it usually doesn't happen. Candidates and political parties are simply branded as "tax cutters" or "big government" because it's easier for the public to absorb. It's unfortunate that this is the case, but at least there is one guy out there with the courage and integrity to publicly take on this reasonable position. On the other hand, I'm not sure Mayor Bloomberg is a scalable model for other young politicians to follow. Something tells me billions of dollars of personal wealth and political success without a party affiliation is not a likely scenario for most young politicians.