ONE month remains in the battle over impending sequestration and tax increases on Capitol Hill, and no one can settle on the right metaphor to capture just what will happen on January 1st if no deal is reached.

The “Thelma-and-Louise”-esque “fiscal cliff” was coined by Ben Bernanke, the Fed chairman, in February. At once the scariest and most misleading image, “fiscal cliff” gives the impression of a federal government hurtling over the edge, with legislators flung into a valley of mayhem and privation, limbs scattered among so many reams of tattered paper.

Democrats seem to favour the term “fiscal slope”, a milquetoast alternative which suggests that following the January 1st deadline, America will find itself on a slow, gentle descent into recession that can be fairly easily reversed in the first few months of 2013 with the right legislative fixes. This is one slope that is not so slippery.

And then there is Ezra Klein’s favoured term:

We at Wonkblog call it the “austerity crisis.” That solves two problems. First, the danger the economy faces is too much austerity too quickly, so swapping the term “fiscal” for the word “austerity” actually better reflects the situation. Second, while we don’t know if it’ll be a cliff or a slope, we do know that it will, if permitted to go on for long enough, be a “crisis.” Thus, the “austerity crisis.”

The most austere of the three metaphors, “austerity crisis” nevertheless stirs anxiety in anyone who watched Greek parliamentarians spar over budget cuts and dodge petrol bombs thrown by an angry populace last month. At least the Greeks were picking and choosing their budget cuts and tax increases; if Congress does nothing, it will enable big automatic cuts to domestic and defence discretionary spending and bring all tax levels back up to where they were under Bill Clinton. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this heady budgetary cocktail will lead to a 0.5% drop in GDP and 9.1% unemployment.

Will Congress let this happen?

Despite new signs of intransigence from both sides, most observers are betting against that possibility. Last week Tom Cole, a representative from Oklahoma, became the first Republican lawmaker to state his support for cutting a deal on the Bush tax cuts that would let rates for the wealthy rise. Other GOP legislators are abandoning their pledge to Grover Norquist to never raise taxes. The stage seems to be set for a package of budget cuts, entitlement reforms and tax increases to gain bipartisan approval. The question is when. Here is how UBS, the global financial-services firm, assessed the probabilities of different scenarios in a recent report to its investors (a “pothole” is a temporary bump in the road in early 2013 if a deal isn’t concluded in December):

Their best bet is that Congress and the president will reach a grand bargain—a comprehensive package of budget cuts and targeted tax increases for high earners—some months after the deadline passes. But UBS estimates only a 10% chance of a full solution in December.

Which raises the question: why not do it now? Why subject America to the threat of another credit-rating downgrade and more economic instability? Why not use these weeks before the Christmas holiday to prepare a sensible package for the American people? Why not use this moment as an opportunity to govern responsibly?

Instead, the apt metaphor for the partisan dance now on display in Washington is the game of chicken. Yes, chicken: the James Dean, “Rebel Without a Cause” dare-you game in which you die or are shamed for being the first to jump out of a car hurtling towards an abyss. The objective of the game is to glorify the bigger risk-taker, and it often ends in tragedy.

Political leaders are not elected to achieve dubious signifiers of glory for themselves or their parties. They are not elected to endanger their constituents. The president and members of Congress should put an end to the cascade of doomsday metaphors and address the crisis now. We’ll sate our appetite for cliffhangers at the movies.