KeithHennessey.com

Conventional wisdom says the tenure of President George W. Bush was dominated by partisanship. This conventional wisdom ignores significant bipartisan legislative accomplishments led by President Bush. If President Obama wants bipartisan legislative success, he could learn a few things from his predecessor.

I have been fairly aggressive in my recent criticism of the Administration. I figure it’s time I say something positive about good things they are trying to do. Here are six of President Obama’s economic policies that I support.

Let’s compare the public option of health care reform with a carbon cap in the clean energy/climate change/cap-and-trade debate.

The President is in a tough spot. In December he will send his representatives to the global climate change negotiations in Copenhagen, and the American delegation is likely to disappoint those who advocate for a global agreement pricing carbon. I don’t think the President can deliver the U.S. Senate to set a national carbon price. Copenhagen is going to be uncomfortable for U.S. negotiators whose body language suggests they are sympathetic to the views of European Greens.

The President is scheduled to hold a press conference Wednesday evening at 8 PM EDT. I offer twenty questions about economic policy for consideration by members of the White House press corps. They cover the economy, stimulus, taxes, autos, health care, energy and climate change, and trade.

The President’s new message is: No second stimulus. This one will work. Ride it out and be patient.

The President and Vice President have this week sent mixed and confusing signals on the macroeconomic picture. This seems to be part of a broader problem with the Administration’s ability to send clear, coordinated, and internally consistent signals on economic policy.

Sometimes it helps to zoom way out. Here is a summary I would give to someone who had missed the past six months, including the good, the bad, the non-existent, the uncertain, and the too-soon-to-tell.

The House passed the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill last Friday on a largely party-line 219-212 vote. The New York Times editorial board now urges the Senate both to strengthen and pass the House-passed bill. But the Senate is right of the House on climate, so the choice will be to strengthen or pass a bill. Senate passage would require “weakening” the bill from the standpoint of a cap-and-trade advocate. This legislative situation provides me with a great teaching opportunity about the hard choices of practical legislating.

Why does the President not say “climate change?” Will the House cap-and-trade bill create millions of new jobs in America — jobs that can’t be shipped overseas? Will the nation that leads in the creation of a clean energy economy lead the 21st century’s global economy? Who really pays for a cap-and-trade bill?