Now that the election is behind us, concerns over the “fiscal cliff” dominate the headlines. The term “fiscal cliff” describes a combination of tax increases and spending reductions which kick in automatically on Jan. 1, 2013, unless concerted action is taken by Congress and the president. The analogy to going over a cliff comes from the massive drop in fiscal support for the economy, and the key challenge is how to address our burgeoning federal debt ($16 trillion and counting) without throwing the U.S. economy back into recession.

I discussed the fiscal cliff in greater detail in October. Today I add my voice to those calling for Congress and the president to, forgive the indelicate phrasing, do their jobs.

What is the job of our elected leaders? Well, beyond the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, they also pledge to “well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office …” to which they have been elected. Managing the country’s finances is not explicitly addressed, but it seems reasonable to suggest that implicit in the promise to discharge the duties of their office is an obligation to govern the nation – and in particular, the nation’s finances – effectively.

Looking at the question of the fiscal cliff through the lens of good governance is not a novel concept, nor original to me. During an interview with CNBC on Oct. 24, Jeffrey Immelt, chairman and CEO of General Electric Co., observed, “If [the fiscal cliff] does happen, that’s a failure of governance, and that’s something we shouldn’t expect.”

Indeed we should not. The notion of good governance comes from the boardroom, where a small number of individuals are charged with effectively governing a larger organization in the interests of its owners or members. If you have served on the board of any organization, you know that board service calls upon us to fulfill a special fiduciary duty – a duty, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, “to act for someone else’s benefit, while subordinating one’s personal interest to that of the other person.”

And chief among the responsibilities of any board is to ensure the long-term survival of the organization by managing its finances effectively.

Our democratic republic entrusts critical fiscal decisions, upon which the long-term viability of our nation depends, to the wisdom of a tiny handful of our fellow citizens. It is not too much to hold those elected leaders to at least as high a standard as we do the governing boards of our churches, charities, universities and businesses.

At a surface level, it may seem adequate to simply ask elected officials to follow their conscience and hold them accountable through the ballot box. Though election to office is inarguably the ultimate test of the right of each individual to serve, it sets a rather low bar for conduct once in office. And, notwithstanding frequently exaggerated claims of a “mandate,” it provides scant information about whether any public body acting collectively is governing well or even acceptably. Yes, in the end we vote for each candidate for office individually. But part of our calculus, it seems to me, should be whether they have contributed to effective governance of the nation.

In my October column, I suggested that America was going to go over the fiscal cliff. But going over the cliff need not need be calamitous. Congress and the president have choices: They can reject any form of compromise and send the nation headlong off the cliff on Jan. 1. Or they can work together to lead the nation down from atop our mountain of debt by getting our fiscal house in order.

This should not be a partisan, ideological debate. American families and businesses have, by and large, gotten their fiscal houses in order. It is time for our federal government to do the same. The fragile state of our economy requires that this be a journey over time, but let us begin.