It's the economy, stupid!" This phrase, posted by James Carville in campaign headquarters during the 1992 presidential election, is considered by some to be the underlying theme that helped President Clinton win the first of his two terms of office. Sixteen years later, that statement remains central to our national psyche, and rightly so. But it is essential that we dig beyond campaign slogans and sound bites to address underlying causes.

Just like the $600 stimulus check didn't keep folks from getting laid off, neither will a $700 billion (and counting) bailout rebuild the foundation of our economy. I believe that an essential part of any strategy for economic recovery must include a comprehensive energy plan that helps guide both the public and private sectors in a way that ensures a sound environment, energy for new economic development and some level of certainty for investors. The energy plan will have many components that everyone will agree to - more renewable energy, less dependence on foreign oil and better stewardship of the resources we have; these are the easy steps.

But the real guts of a truly comprehensive energy policy will be more complicated and less agreeable to all. One of the reasons we got into this mess is the reluctance of our elected leaders to move in any direction that would upset some constituency.

It appears that we have come to a point where any step will necessarily be on someone's toes. It is clearly time to move forward, not with disdain for the special interests that, in good faith, are making their case, but in the realization that any responsible and effective energy policy will require compromise and sacrifice by all. Every American needs to come to grips with the fact that our energy policy is almost certain to contain elements that you personally dislike.

If you are actively opposed to nuclear power, you are bound to be disappointed. While it may not be a permanent solution, and most certainly will not be "too cheap to meter" (as predicted by Lewis Strauss, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, in 1954), nuclear energy is the only viable source for baseload (always on) electricity production that we can use to replace coal and seriously curtail greenhouse gas emissions in the immediate future.

If you think keeping energy costs low is the most important goal, then you will be disappointed as well. Federal subsidies and sweetheart deals have contributed to our abundance of energy sources, and have kept the cost of energy at an unsustainably low level. This low cost has fueled our economic expansion of the past 100 years. However, the very fact that we have historically paid so little for energy has contributed to a culture in which we value it so little. We fritter it away. The cost of energy must increase, for several decades, at least, because the traditional sources are limited and the new sources have not yet been sufficiently developed.

If you are a believer in the free market as the most effective solution to technology development, then you will be disappointed. Even before the financial meltdown, the free market walked off the field and sat on the sidelines. Investment money for new, large-scale electrical generation facilities dried up long before the subprime loan fiasco blew up. The federal government not only has a role, but a responsibility to actively shape our energy future through regulation, incentives and, most importantly, aggressive support of research and development.

And finally, if you are a fan of hardball, winner-take-all, down-and-dirty partisan politics, then I surely hope you will be disappointed. It is time for our leaders to stop seeing the future of our country through the lens of individual and party gain - our very existence as a free and prosperous nation is at stake. It is time to get to work, listen to experts who know the science and the technology and stop using our energy policy as a political football. It is time for our leaders to make tough and sometimes unpopular decisions that need to be made. It is time to lead. If not now, when?

John Gardner is associate vice president for energy research, policy and campus sustainability at Boise State University.