Now that the great health debate is behind us, Congress will be turning to two other major issues - financial reform and immigration.

This week, Senate Republicans were able to block a Democratic bill addressing a number of financial reform issues. Among other objections, Republicans pointed to the establishment of a fund that the GOP charged could be used to bail out large companies in trouble, in effect a continuation of the “too big to fail” doctrine underpinning the 2008 bailouts. Also, the Republicans objected to the formation of a new consumer protection agency that the GOP asserts has excessive powers. Also, Republicans insisted that the new legislation should address issues involving failed housing lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Few would argue against some new regulation. The combination of extremely complex financial products, huge leverage by major financial institutions and laxity of oversight both in the private sector (rating agencies) and the public sector (particularly the Securities and Exchange Commission) created a situation in 2008 where senior regulators felt compelled to arrange shotgun marriages between a number of the players and then had to ask Congress to help in the form of the TARP legislation, in the very real belief that the entire financial system might collapse otherwise.

One would hope that, in contrast to the health care bill that was rammed through on party lines, Democrats and Republicans can work together toward a generally acceptable bill. There are numerous areas of common ground, such as finding a procedure for dealing with ailing financial institutions that does not amount to rewarding bad behavior. In addition, there is some consensus on regulating derivatives in light of the prior debacle. This legislation could benefit from the best thinking and cooperation of the parties.

Rather suddenly, the immigration issue has also become a major issue in Washington. This is in the wake of passage of a law in Arizona that permits local police officers involved in a “lawful contact” with an individual who have “reasonable suspicion” that the individual is an illegal alien to require that the individual show immigration papers. Previously, only federal authorities could enforce immigration laws.

Many people are frankly uncomfortable with this legislation. It inevitably will trigger charges of profiling by police, encourage pretextual stops by law enforcement and also impede many contacts between police and immigrants needed to investigate and punish crimes. And the “your papers, please” approach just seems too intrusive to be a viable solution to the immigration issue.

On the other hand, it is easy to understand why the state acted. With the effective closing of many border crossings in Californian, huge numbers of illegal immigrants have streamed through Arizona, seemingly without much of a federal response, straining resources and causing considerable damage. Very recently, a rancher was killed on his property near the border, apparently by a migrant. The Arizona legislature simply decided to put enforcement in the hands of people who might be capable of effective action.

Ideally, Congress will work together on legislation that will effectively seal the border (whether through building a fence, military patrols or otherwise), while also permitting sufficient legal immigration and creating an effective path to citizenship for undocumented people already here. Only time will tell, however, if progress on the immigration issue, as opposed to namecalling, will result.

Congress may also take up other issues like climate change (even if the cap and trade bill seems dead), but if it can just find reasoned, bipartisan solutions to financial reform and immigration, it will have accomplished quite a bit.