海角大神

President Obama鈥檚 speech last week in Osawatomie, Kansas was widely recognized as an important and revealing look at his domestic policy framing and agenda as the election year begins in earnest.聽聽 As I pointed out, the contrast between YOYO (you鈥檙e on your own) economics and the trickle-down, starve-the-beast agenda it implies, and the President鈥檚 we鈥檙e-in-this-together agenda has the potential to be deeply resonant with the vast majority of Americans for whom YOYO has been a terrible bust.

What that in mind, it makes sense to add some concrete to the structure the President began to build鈥攖o begin to think about which policies grow out of the contrasting views of political economy he compellingly introduced.

But first, I鈥檇 like to suggest a few criteria for what constitutes useful ideas in this context.

Move the Needle on Unemployment: Stuff like patent reform, free trade deals, 鈥渄oubling exports鈥� (with no regard to imports) doesn鈥檛 cut it.聽 There may be other reasons to undertake such measures, but the heart of the speech were new, real economic opportunities for the middle class.聽 This was not a call for fumbling around the edges or scoring points with interest groups.

Politically Viable in More Normal Times: In terms of helpful economic policy, I鈥檓 afraid almost nothing鈥檚 going anywhere useful for the next year.聽 When high-ranking members of one party聽publicly聽promulgate that their goal is to sink the President鈥攅ven if that means sinking the economy as well鈥�in such a climate, the concept of 鈥減olitical viability鈥� has little meaning.

That said, our policy process cannot be driven by the current dysfunctionality.聽 We have to plan as if our system has regained its ability to self-correct, while working our butts off to help it actually get back there.

So, onto to the agenda.

The President targeted four areas in last week鈥檚 speech: higher education, infrastructure, progressive taxation, and financial regulation.聽 That鈥檚 a good start.聽 For now, I鈥檒l just introduce what I think are the key policy issues in each case.

Higher Ed: Improving college access and particularly completion will not create jobs, but it will address both opportunity barriers faced by less advantaged kids and diminished economic mobility.聽 The President has worked hard to significantly increase Pell Grants for college affordability but these increases are very much in the YOYO鈥檚 crosshairs.聽 Income-based-repayment initiatives are important for highly indebted students. 聽聽Completion is trickier but helping low-income students with tuition costs may be less important here, especially for those in community college, then helping them with the costs of their lives while they鈥檙e going to school.

However, we must be mindful that education policy is supply-side. 聽It鈥檚 critically important, it鈥檚 a huge part of our everyday lives, and it鈥檚 an area of true interest to the President. 聽But as people realize much more than politicians these days, it鈥檚 a lesser part of the solution to our biggest medium term challenge: the quantity of jobs. 聽There are too many educated people out there that are all dressed up with nowhere to go.

Infrastructure: This is one place to invest a lot of energy in setting a jobs agenda.聽 As I鈥檝e traversed the land in recent months, the idea that there鈥檚 much more we should be doing to improve the quality of the nation鈥檚 skeleton, as it were, is something I鈥檝e heard from people from all walks of life.聽 It鈥檚 a great country, but it鈥檚 old and needs work.

FAST! is still a great marriage and problem and solution, and in fact is likely up for a vote in the Senate any day now.聽 Like I said, it鈥檚 a heavy lift for good ideas to get filibuster-proof majorities these days, but you鈥檝e got to be in this for the long fight.

The key here is to not get hung up on shovel ready鈥攍ike-it-or-not, we鈥檒l need the work for much longer than that. 聽We need to think about large-scale ideas that go beyond roads and bridges.聽 An advantage聽 to projects like FAST! is that people can relate to this type of thing in their daily lives.聽 In that light, I鈥檇 like to see a national project to bury electricity and phone lines, something that would be hugely popular here in the aging Bos-Wash corridor, where you can easily lose power for weeks when hit by those 30-year storms that now seem to show up every six months.

Tax Reform: Again, there are no direct jobs here鈥攊t鈥檚 not demand side policy鈥攕o I wouldn鈥檛 get hung up on it.聽 But as the President stressed in the speech, public infrastructure investment costs money, so fiscal policy of course has to be in the mix.聽 And you can鈥檛 have an election without arguing about it.

But I鈥檇 keep it very simple.聽 In fact, I鈥檇 bring it down to one thing: we鈥檙e no longer going to favor one type of income over another.聽聽 The distortions in the tax code around 鈥渋nvestment income,鈥� like capital gains and dividends, are losing tons of revenue, feeding inequality, and at the heart of the 鈥淏uffett problem鈥濃�攖he fact that many of the wealthiest households face lower rates than average folks.聽 And, like all the above, this is both great politics and great policy.

Much more to come on all this鈥�we鈥檙e just getting started.聽 I鈥檇 add manufacturing policy to the agenda, but even more so , I鈥檇 stress things we can do to improve the quality of low-wage, low value-added (at least in pure dollar terms), non-tradable, service jobs鈥擨 suspect we鈥檒l be adding a lot of these once the recovery actually takes hold (think home-health aides, cashiers, security guards).

Whoever wins the R鈥檚 nomination, the competing vision will be between the YOYOs and their trickle-down on one side, and ideas like those above on the other.聽 In essence, the conservative vision will be looking back toward GW Bush, arguing that everything鈥檚 basically fine in the economy except that the President needs to go, the wealthy need to keep more of their pretax income, and the EPA needs to be shut down.

That will not resonate beyond the base.聽 And neither will it win the day unless there鈥檚 nothing on the other side. 聽 In that regard, the President took a great first step in Kansas.