The first leadership test for Gov. John Baldacci in his second term will be whether he can stand back and allow the Legislature to guide the GrowSmart Maine report on shrinking government and investing this state. The governor admires the report and all but says he wants it as part of his legacy, but unless he is willing to embrace it less tightly, he will smother the plan with good intentions.

This is an unusual situation for Baldacci, who struggled in his first term when he left the pace of legislation and the tone of the debate to others. Now he wants to be out front on this model for improving life here. “Charting Maine’s Future,” produced by the Brookings Institution for GrowSmart, would cut spending, export taxes to tourists and invest in jobs and the downtowns, rural communities and undeveloped places that make Maine distinct.

The admirable reasoning for these reforms, to oversimplify, is that Maine now spends so much money on government that doesn’t do enough to advance the state’s wellbeing it cannot afford to invest in what would.

But two things are needed for the Brookings recommendations to become successful: Public support for cutting government now, of making some sacrifices – over, say, the amount of local school administration – to reap the larger benefit of sustainable prosperity; and substantial bonds for community revitalization and land conservation, for research and development and job growth. In both cases, Republican support is essential, either to endorse (and not campaign against) the report, and to send the bond requests to voters, a journey that requires the approval of two-thirds of the Legislature.

This won’t happen unless Republicans – and legislative Democrats, for that matter – help shape the bills related to the report. They should be urged to participate not merely because it will make them feel better, but because their ideas matter.

Take the first piece of business in the Brookings report, a commission that would analyze cuts to government and recommend between $60 and $100 million in annual savings. This commission would operate like base-closure commissions: The Legislature could either accept its entire report or reject it but not modify its findings. The Brookings report sees this as a complicated exercise, requiring expertise to ensure the cuts are made intelligently so that Maine has a sense of priorities about what should go, but that services are not unnecessarily harmed and the cuts stick – no unpleasant discoveries 12 or 18 months later that eliminated positions turn out to be essential to government operation and are quietly restored.

The governor, however, likes the thought of these cuts so much that he is considering making them through the state budget, due out in early January. Whether this is possible is open to debate. Whether it is wise is not. I talked this week with Republican state Sens. Richard Rosen, Peter Mills and Karl Turner, three thoughtful and moderate lawmakers who represent the best chance Democrats have of passing the Brookings work – if they don’t want it, the rest of their caucus certainly won’t. None of them was enthusiastic about the governor making the cuts through the budget.

And each of the three expressed other doubts about the plan. Mills, who is a one-man crusade to draw attention to the state’s unfunded pension and health-care liabilities, says he currently sees the report as a chance for Democrats to spend more money while cutting only around the edges. Rosen says too much of the report addresses too little of what is ailing Maine – those unfunded liabilities and Maine’s growing dependence on increasingly unaffordable social-service programs. Turner was the most optimistic about the report, but said the state’s current obligations made the large bond requests difficult to accept. He gave the plan “middling odds, maybe 50-50” of passing.

To improve those odds, lawmakers can adjust the plan. Brookings’ $60 million to $100 million in savings is conservative – the studies in its report that looked at inefficiency at all levels of Maine government saw the potential for much higher savings. A more ambitious figure – $150 million, say – with part of that devoted to paying down the unfunded liability would be fiscally prudent and demonstrate that this wasn’t just an excuse to spend more tax dollars elsewhere.

I don’t mean to suggest this would be easy, or even painless, just that it is necessary if Maine is to have the resources to invest in its future. Legislative leaders from both parties are crucial to making that happen in a meaningful way – neither party would cut deeply and face voters’ wrath on its own.

This is an opportunity for the governor to serve Maine well by being a forceful advocate for the changes contemplated by the Legislature through this reform, but not confusing leadership with ownership. If the Brookings work is carried out correctly over the next several years, everyone should feel like an owner of a stronger state.

Todd Benoit is the editorial page editor of the Bangor Daily News.