Once again, states are setting an example for the federal government. This time, the area is fiscal responsibility.

Just as many states tackled education and welfare reform before Washington, a number are recognizing that a balanced approach to fiscal problems requires both spending cuts and tax increases.

To some degree, that reflects the pressures of constitutional requirements for balanced budgets. But it also reflects a maturing of leadership attitudes and a recognition that anti-tax rhetoric must be tempered to meet the needs and desires of the electorate.

Interestingly, some Republicans are producing balanced-budget plans despite strong pressure from anti-tax conservatives who threaten retaliation at the polls. According to the National Governors’ Assn., governors in more than half of the states have proposed either tax or fee increases this year. A majority are Republicans, reflecting their proportion of state governorships.

That pattern is evident in Texas, where the Republican-controlled Legislature cut spending to meet budget problems last year. Now, it is considering increased state taxes to help provide more school aid and reduce reliance on local property taxes.

It is too early to know if something will pass or what the specifics will be. But the approach of House Speaker Tom Craddick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is in line with other states’ efforts to cope with fiscal pressures resulting from higher Medicaid costs, the slow economy and limits on federal aid.

Perhaps the most noteworthy example is Virginia, a conservative state with conservative fiscal attitudes where the GOP has a firm grip on the legislature. Initially, most Republicans were critical when Mark Warner, the moderate Democratic governor, proposed a large package that reduced the taxes of about two-thirds of Virginians but increased those of the upper third of the income spectrum.

He was trying to close a deficit resulting from increased spending, reduced revenue due to the economy and his GOP predecessor’s popular but expensive measure to phase out an unpopular car tax. A deadlock quickly developed. While some Senate Republicans joined Democrats in backing increased taxes, House Republicans were opposed. The regular session ended without budget approval.

But then pressure from teachers, police officers and other officials persuaded some GOP legislators that, while constituents liked lower taxes, they feared cutbacks in health care, education, transportation and other state services.

Despite threats of retaliation from conservative groups, enough House Republicans joined with their Senate colleagues and Warner to enact a compromise package with a bigger tax increase than he initially proposed.

Though the budget battle in Richmond is over, the political fallout is continuing. Stephen Moore, who heads the influential conservative Club for Growth, called Republican lawmakers who backed the plan “Benedict Arnolds,” and he vowed to campaign against them in next year’s legislative elections, “even if it meant that Democrats came back into control.”

In Texas, GOP lawmakers already have backed away from some tax hikes in the initial tax package, which Gov. Rick Perry has criticized as a “job killer.”

What happened in Virginia, and may happen in Texas, contrasts sharply with what isn’t happening in Washington. Without fiscal discipline or the constraints of a statutory budget limitation law, President Bush and top Republicans in Congress continue to resist any effort to curb tax cuts passed in recent years. They have stalemated budget talks by resisting a measure backed by some Senate Republicans that would require that the cost of maintaining tax cuts be offset elsewhere in the budget.

Bush has made it clear that, if re-elected, he will keep pushing to make the tax cuts permanent and extend them past current expiration dates. But unless the economy soars enough to erase the deficit, he may have to face the reality that states now are confronting.

Carl P. Leubsdorf is Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News.