There is wide consensus that the financial crisis has passed, yet the economy remains weak with the most troubling aspect being high unemployment.

Jobless numbers have been getting less-bad, but they still are not good. Unemployment hit 9.8 percent in September, up from 9.7 percent in August, and it now stands at the highest level since 1983. Most economists expect the unemployment figures to remain stubbornly high through most of 2010 or even into 2011.

For that reason, Congress should give serious consideration to proposals that would provide federal tax credits to companies that hire new workers.

Getting the U.S. economy moving requires consumers to spend more, and with 15 million people unemployed, that is unlikely. So, increasing numbers of economists support the idea of offering tax credits for hiring workers.

It's an appealing idea.

Many questions remain over the effectiveness of the $787 billion stimulus plan passed by Congress early this year. The massive spending package was rushed through Congress and contained many examples of questionable spending. It also spread out spending over several years, when most people expected the bulk of spending to be more immediate.

And contrary to the way the stimulus package was marketed, with all the talk of "shovel-ready construction projects" for roads and bridges, the money has so far gone mostly to states to help plug budget gaps.

Over the summer, a poll showed nearly 50 percent of Americans favored canceling the rest of the stimulus spending. Given that, there might be support for diverting some of the unspent stimulus funding to pay for a job-creation tax credit.

As with any Washington program, the devil is in the details. Last tried on the federal level in 1977-78, there is growing support for a new and improved version of a job-creation tax credit.

The value of the tax credit would play a large role in how many employers move to hire new workers. And there are concerns that employers view the economy as so weak, they would not hire workers even with a tax credit.

Current proposals suggest a credit of 15 percent of the cost of adding a new employee, but the value of the credit would decline in the second year and then vanish.

The tax credit for hiring new workers would work only if it made economic sense for the business — adding the employee would increase sales and profits.

Still, it's estimated that a job-creation tax credit could lead to 2 million or even 3 million new jobs. And more people working would translate into more people being able to spend, and that could help revive the broader economy.

Unlike the $787 billion stimulus plan, which shoveled money to states and various favored projects, which in some cases looked like political payback, the job-creation tax credit would be driven by demand, not politics. Another difference: The stimulus funding went only to certain sectors of the economy, but a job-creation tax credit would be available to all employers.

Another advantage of the job-creation tax credit is that its cost to the federal government would depend on how many jobs were created. If few jobs were created, the program would be deemed a failure, but it would not have cost much money. That's not the case with the existing stimulus plan, which many people argue has not succeeded, yet adds nearly $1 trillion to the federal deficit.

With a tax credit for new jobs, the spending — or cost to the government — is not incurred unless significant new hiring takes place. And if that happens, then the program will be working.

Some advocates suggest targeting the job-creation tax credit at small businesses, since small business provides most of the jobs in the U.S. Another reason for that kind of targeting is that many big businesses already have benefited from federal bailout assistance.

The only downside of the program is that if it were to work, Washington politicians would be quick to claim credit for creating the jobs, when it would have been businesses, not career politicians, who deserve the praise.

Still, the idea is worth exploring.