Until they figure out how to grow money from magic beans, there are two ways for a government to balance its budget: raise taxes or cut spending (or a combination of the two).

Early this year, Ohio Gov. Bob Taft offered a plan to do the former. To balance the 2004-05 budget, which could be $3 billion in the red, Taft proposed tax reforms, including a broader sales tax that would increase the state's haul by about $2.3 billion.

This week, House Republicans offered an alternative that looks like it does the latter. It wisely adopts some of Taft's reform ideas, such as simplifying and lowering personal income tax rates, but only broadens sales taxes enough to take in $100 million extra. Otherwise, it is revenue-neutral. To make up the difference, lawmakers propose deep spending cuts.

So they say. Here's the reality. The House plan, at least in proposals that circulated this week, performs much of its magic by whacking $1.4 billion out of the $2.4 billion in state funds to cities, counties and libraries. But the GOP lets local entities recoup their losses by giving them greater taxing authority - easier sales tax hikes, county income taxes, real estate tax tweaks and more. As the Church Lady would say, how conveeeenient.

This doesn't cut spending. It just changes who collects the taxes - and lets state lawmakers claim they held the line on taxes. They're going to have to do better than that. If they have to increase tax revenue, they should just do it, admit they're doing it, and make the arguments to justify it. But if they're committed to real spending cuts - which so far remain in "player to be named later" status - they should put their money where their mouth is. Here's some help:

• The Ohio Taxpayers Association has an eight-point plan - eliminate 31 programs, enact across-the-board cuts, pass a law to limit spending growth, and so on.

• In February, the Washington-based Cato Institute released an in-depth analysis of the states' fiscal performance since 1990, concluding that states should use the current crisis to enact strict spending and tax caps.

This is urgent for Ohio. Since 1990, its spending has grown faster than in any other state except Montana, Cato notes. Ohio's system needs fundamental change to enforce accountability and encourage stability.