Okay, you’re the President. And you are about to address a joint session of Congress. You walk into the well of the House of Representatives and step to the podium in front of the entire Congress. You ask: By a show of hands, who here is fiscally responsible with our nation’s checkbook? Naturally, everyone in front of you raises their hand. Yet somehow, despite the unanimous enthusiasm in Congress for financial prudence, our country is drowning in red ink. How can this be?

This week, House Republicans, who many commentators are predicting will regain the majority, released their Pledge to America , a throwback to the Contract with America they announced before the historic rout they pulled off in the 1994 elections. In it, the Republican leadership sets forth its plan to halt the President’s agenda and restore – yes – fiscal sanity to Congress. And, not surprisingly, there are more than few places where vague language, caveats and exceptions undercut what they are promising.

They promise to cut government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels … with the exception of spending on seniors, veterans and defense. Besides the fact that when considering our budget woes everything should be on the table, this exception leaves a pretty small slice of budgetary pie to start whittling away. It is difficult to believe they could carve out the promised $100 billion in savings. The section on budget process reform begins with a promise to protect entitlements – only promising to get a full accounting of them, setting benchmarks and reviewing them. Not exactly a profile in budgetary courage here.

Conspicuously missing from either the “Stopping Out of Control Spending” or “Reform Congress and Restore Trust” sections is any mention of earmark reform or the existing House Republican earmark moratorium. Considering this has been a hot topic and earmarks have been subject to so much public criticism (and not just from us), that's a pretty big hole. This is just further evidence that the House Republican Conference is in a quandary as to what to do with earmarks. One vocal part of the conference, led by Republican appropriators, want earmarks back in a big way, while others would rein them in or eliminate them entirely. Guess they haven't figured that out yet.

But that's just half of the lawmakers you see jumping up and down with their hands up. On the other side of the aisle, you have the Democrats pointing to the PAYGO (or pay-as-you-go) law – new spending or tax changes must be offset and cannot to add to the federal deficit – as proof of their commitment to fiscal responsibility. As nice as PAYGO sounds, it has so many holes it has at times become more of a shield to deflect criticism than an actual form of accountability. Sure, the requirement for offsets has stopped some new programs and spending in the margins, but billions of dollars are exempted and annual spending increases in discretionary and entitlement spending continue unabated. Like the Republican pledge, PAYGO is more smoke than fire.

It seems every politician wants to claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility without being fiscally responsible. Political promises come and go, we will have to see if this most recent pledge has any traction or is even remotely implementable. Remember, the vast majority of the much ballyhooed Contract with America never got implemented.