We hope that President Obama's White House meeting with congressional Republicans on Tuesday was more than symbolic. All who took part surely recognize that a new level of bipartisanship -- and compromise -- will be needed on a host of pressing issues, including the fate of the Bush tax cuts.

Without action before Dec. 31, the cuts will expire at a time when the economy is showing signs of life but isn't nearly healthy enough to swallow a tax increase across all income levels. After the Tuesday meeting, there were signs that some behind-closed-doors dealmaking could lead to a temporary extension of the cuts, although details were sketchy.

In September, this page advocated for a plan, first proposed by economist Tom Gallagher, that would extend the Bush rates for the top two tax brackets for one year (through 2011) and for the bottom four brackets for three years (through 2013).

The two-step extension would buy more time for the economic recovery to gain momentum, and it would also decouple the richest taxpayers from the middle class. The proposal was based on the idea that some version of Obama's plan to extend the cuts only for those households earning less than $250,000 a year and individuals earning less than $200,000 would kick in automatically in 2012, meaning higher taxes for a small percentage of lofty-income Americans who should be carrying a greater share of the tax burden. And with expiration of the tax cut extension for taxpayers of more modest means set for the year after the 2012 presidential election, Gallagher smartly argued, Congress would be forced to confront the issue again when political and economic conditions should be more conducive -- at long last -- for a broad debate about deficit-reduction strategies.

The decoupling plan still makes economic sense, but the political realities changed with the Republican landslide in November. Obama is taking a more conciliatory approach than he was in September because there's no way he and his party can win on his original tax-the-wealthy strategy now. As business columnist David Leonhardt pointed out in Wednesday's New York Times, if the administration can't broker a deal that can get 60 votes in the Senate -- meaning gaining support from two Republicans -- the GOP could filibuster until the tax cuts expire Dec. 31.

The new Republican majority could then push for a retroactive tax cut in January, forcing Obama and Democrats to accept the GOP's legislation or suffer the political fallout from an unpopular and economically stifling across-the-board tax hike. By dawdling this fall and more recently backing an extension of the Bush tax cuts for all but those who earn more than a $1 million a year, the Democrats lost any strategic advantage they may have had before the election. Unlinking the tax brackets -- a proposal that admittedly never gained traction in Congress -- is not likely to surface now.

The best-case scenario now seems to be that all of the cuts will be extended for two years and, at the same time, Democrats will win approval for an extension of unemployment benefits. Also on the table is a GOP-friendly tax cut for businesses that add workers, as well as a payroll tax cut. Somewhere in that mix is a compromise that might actually help address the most vexing challenge in the ongoing recovery from the Great Recession -- reducing unemployment.

As for deficit reduction: Stay tuned. If nothing else, the final report released Wednesday by the president's fiscal commission is a dose of reality and a jump-start for a much-needed national debate on how best to address that larger national problem.