Source:Brookings Institution– President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) giving his 2015 SOTU.

Source:The New Democrat

“As President Obama strode to the podium to deliver his 2015 State of the Union address, he had good reason to feel confident. Helped by a surge of job creation, and probably by lower gas prices as well, public satisfaction with the state of the economy and confidence in its future course had risen substantially during the past three months. Not coincidentally, so had the president’s job approval. Seemingly unfazed by his party’s rout in the 2014 midterm elections, he responded by going on the offensive with a series of bold executive orders and actions. And the White House’s innovative decision to release major policy proposals in advance of the speech garnered public attention, much of it favorable.

Still, as Mr. Obama began speaking, a key uncertainty remained: What balance would he strike between the desire to shape the political terrain for 2016 and the imperatives of governing in 2015? The former required bold initiatives, of a kind likely to evoke sharply negative reactions from Republicans who command majorities in both the House and the Senate. But successful legislating this year will require compromise with those very majorities. Could he thread the needle, making the Democratic political case for next year without undermining the possibility of legislative progress this year?

Mr. Obama delivered a clear, forceful, partisan speech whose substance stood in tension with his closing invocation of One America. In working to shape the political terrain for 2016, he may have weakened whatever prospects there were for meaningful cooperation with the opposition this year on issues other than trade.

The White House apparently believes that Republicans will be able to distinguish between agenda-setting rhetoric and the quieter process of legislation. Republican leaders probably can. Whether their rank-and-file will be able or willing to do the same is another matter.

Early in his speech, the president tried to crystallize the changing public mood. We’ve been through tough times over the part fifteen years, and for many, the tough times remain. “But tonight,” he declared, “we turn the page.” He dubbed 2014 a “breakthrough year” for the U.S. economy and cited the end of U.S. combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Overall, he affirmed, “The shadow of crisis has passed.”

No doubt many Republicans would disagree, especially about the state of the world. And they would have a case. There is an arc of crisis from Europe to North Africa and throughout the Middle East. As the Unite States has retreated, the forces of oppression and anarchy have advanced. In recent surveys, majorities of Americans have expressed rising fears about terrorism and doubts that Mr. Obama’s approach to our adversaries has been tough enough. The president’s stated determination to avoid “costly wars that strain our military” may not reassure these skeptics. And his declaration that he would veto new sanctions on Iran while negotiations on its nuclear program continue will only bolster the determination of many legislators in both parties to enact those tougher measures.

When it comes to the economy, the president has a stronger case. Although wages remain stagnant and huge numbers of Americans have left the labor force, job creation accelerated in 2014, unemployment declined, and energy production surged. The budget deficit is down, at least for now. It is not a stretch to argue, as Mr. Obama did, that we are now “freer to write our own future than any nation on earth.” And he declared, in terms both parties now accept, that we must choose between economic growth that yields returns only for the few and growth that offers opportunity and progress to everyone willing to make the effort.

It was in laying out his script for the future that the president sailed into partisan waters. He repeated his calls for costly new initiatives to provide affordable, high-quality childcare and two years of free community college. And his proposal to pay for them with higher taxes on the wealthy will meet a stone wall of Republican rejection.

Still, Mr. Obama urged, there are—or ought to be—areas of possible agreement. Twenty-first century businesses, he said, need 21st century infrastructure—“modern ports, stronger bridges, faster trains, and the fastest internet.” This calls for a “bipartisan infrastructure plan.” The difficulty is that the leading proposals for financing this plan rely on proceeds from tax reform, which in turn requires compromise and negotiation across party lines. One doubts that many Republicans will view the president’s speech as providing the basis for agreement on taxes.”

From Brookings

President Obama looked strong and confident to me last night. I really didn’t have any serious issues with the President’s speech. Going into the speech I was expecting a 2015 version of Morning in America, to pick up from President Ronald Reagan Morning in America campaign theme in 1984. The difference being that President Reagan could say that in year four of his presidency and President Obama it is now year seven. President Obama obviously inheriting a much weaker economy in 2009 than President Reagan in 1981. So I’m not taking a shot at the President.

President Obama was well within his right to that with the Great Recession not only gone, but followed by real economic and job growth and now even wage growth that we haven’t had since the 1990s or so. Now the question is where we go from here to keep the recovery from not only continuing, but to keep it booming. And not only see real unemployment drop, but to see a growing American workforce with wages continuing to grow. And the President put some proposals and ideas on the floor and hopefully he follow that up with real policies in the near-future.

Three areas where I believe President Obama can work with the Republican Congress in the next two-years has to do with infrastructure, trade and tax reform. The House will at least pass the trade bills that have already been negotiated and they’ll probably pass the Senate as well with bipartisan support with at least several Senate Democrats going along. President Obama already has House Republicans at least on board when it comes to infrastructure investment. Now the question is how to fund it.

I think President Obama would be well advised to send up an infrastructure investment bill and layout how he would pay for it. It probably won’t pass the House because it would come with closing tax loopholes that generally just benefit the wealthy to pay for it. But then House Republicans would have the opportunity to pass their own bill and send it to the Senate. And they would probably fund their bill from taxes on new energy projects. And the question would be would that pass the Senate or not and would Senate Democrats accept it, or block Senate Republicans from blocking it.

If making the American economy even stronger than it is, is the top priority in this Republican Congress and I hope it is after national security, then infrastructure and trade have to bills that they pass. Because of all the good jobs that would come as a result. Keystone could definitely be part of that, but won’t be enough to rebuild this country and get our infrastructure system back to the point that it needs to be. You need a comprehensive infrastructure bill as well to rebuild this country and make our economy as strong as it possible can be.