In the aftermath of vicious election rhetoric following two years of intractable gridlock, it is difficult to see anything but political disagreement.  But in between, there still exist several areas of ideological overlap between Republicans and Democrats.  On these issues, the next two years offer a stark choice between continuing the politics of gridlock and developing actual policy solutions.  If governing can trump politics, here are three issues the 112th Congress should pursue.

Energy Investment. Republicans and several coal-state Democrats resoundingly shot down cap-and-trade proposals to make dirty energy more expensive. But the next best alternative, making clean energy cheaper through various incentives and greatly increased federal funding for research and development, might have a better chance. While this idea still has a long way to go among many Republicans, support has sprouted from several sources.  The conservative American Enterprise Institute recently released a report advocating $25 billion per year in federal funding for clean energy development. Several Republican senators, including Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Richard Lugar of Indiana and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have voiced support and introduced bills in this direction, and the U.S. military has consistently called for moves to clean energy. If others value economic, security and climate concerns more than denying President Obama a political victory, they might be willing to come on board as well.

Tax Reform. Virtually every economist would agree that the corporate tax code is remarkably inefficient.  Despite a marginal tax rate way above the world average, the U.S. takes a far lower percentage of revenue from the tax due to a series of loopholes and deductions.  Removing deductions and reducing the marginal rate could encourage business investment, improve the economy and increase tax revenues. This idea will be a win-win unless politics get in the way.

Reducing Long-Run Deficits.  This one will be tricky, but its importance cannot be overstated.  When President Obama’s bipartisan fiscal commission releases a final list of proposed spending cuts and tax increases on Dec. 1, many of the provisions are likely to be unpopular.  Already, political objections are cropping up.  Democratic groups like the Progressive Change Campaign Committee have demonized any adjustments to Social Security as “a policy disaster and a monumental political blunder.” Similarly, many Republicans have made untenable and mathematically impossible pledges to reduce deficits with no tax increases or cuts to defense spending.

But if a bipartisan group commissioned by a Democratic president suggests a package of 75 percent spending cuts and 25 percent tax increases, this might be the best chance we will get to restore our nation’s fiscal health. On defense spending, several Republican senators, including Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mark Kirk of Illinois, Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania have followed the lead of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen in calling for substantial cuts of up to $100 billion per year. On entitlements, the Democrats on this commission have shown flexibility and openness to reform. With the parties splitting power in Congress, the opportunity to make difficult choices might never be better.

Party leaders must identify the areas where agreement can be reached and push relentlessly for compromise, because America literally cannot afford more inaction.