The governors of two states, Maryland and Virginia, have taken two different paths in attempting to manage their respective state budgets.

The first, Republican governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia, focused on cutting spending and reducing the size of government.

The second, Democrat governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland, has hiked taxes significantly and recently announced plans to hike taxes even further.

Now we’re starting to see the results of these plans.

Virginia, which took the spending cut and government reduction plan, just announced a $544 million surplus. That’s in contrast to the $4.2 billion deficit former governor Tim Kaine, a Democrat, left behind.

Maryland, which took the tax hikes and more tax hikes plan, is facing another $1 billion deficit next year. They’re looking at yet more tax hikes in yet another attempt to close the gap.

The stark contrast in outcomes is amazing.

The plan to cut spending and reduce government resulted in a half-billion dollar surplus. The plan to hike taxes resulted in a billion-dollar deficit. Additionally, Virginia has a state unemployment rate of 6.1%. Maryland suffers from a 7.2% unemployment rate.

So which plan should the federal government pursue? One that takes more money from the private sector, suppressing economic growth in order to fuel an unsustainable beast? Or one that cuts spending and reduces the size of government in order to restore fiscal sanity?

The majority of economists say it’s the latter: Spending cuts and government reduction. And recent real-world results demonstrate that their instincts are right.

It’s time to cut reckless spending and reduce the size of government. We need a plan to reduce the number of government agencies, reform entitlement programs, and cut non-defense discretionary spending (defense has already been severely cut this year).

Enough pussy-footing around the issue. It’s time to get serious. It’s time for proven solutions.