NGDP targeting is all the buzz in monetarism right now after gaining quite a bit of support ranging from Paul Krugman to economists over at Goldman Sachs in recent weeks. The proposal would be a switch over from the current central strategy of inflation targeting by the Federal Reserve to a strategy based around targeting nominal GDP. Should the Federal Reserve want to target both aspects of its dual mandate (full employment and price stability) and with the belief that monetary policy can stimulate the economy, NGDP targeting almost obviously seems to be a more encompassing tool than inflation targeting when it comes to meeting both goals. The more definite commitment to stimulus increases expectations and would likely be much more effective than the current sporadic actions through inflation targeting and quantitative easing.
While I believe that NGDP targeting might be more effective at fulfilling the dual mandate, I do not consider myself to be a proponent of it simply because I am not a supporter of the current dual mandate to begin with- particularly, the goal of full employment. While it might seem a goal of noble intention, it often has unintended consequences as we have learned the hard way in recent decades. While NGDP targeting might improve expectations in downturns, it would also likely provide a false crutch in times of prosperity- something that could be a moral hazard.
While NGDP targeting might seem like a savior right now, I think it would be unwise to just jump into this, especially if it is meant to be a permanent fixture. Even before considering NGDP targeting, the dual mandate really needs to be looked over once more so that the negatives it added to the housing bubble and prior to that are considered in its utility before a major policy change is made that further supports it.