The economy is, obviously, the main issue. But, other than getting the budget closer to balance, I am not sure there's much the federal government can do. If oil jumps well above $100 per barrel again, perhaps there will be room to argue for more wells, and more natural gas. If corn prices spike, or there's a real scarcity of food, perhaps we can start to work for ending the ethanol mandate. In addition, the move to more freedom friendly regulations (as opposed to simple deregulation or the command and control version) would be good. A tax code with fewer looholes would probably also be good. (The slogan: "The campaign against K street.")
Beyond that, perhaps Congress should play some small ball. As I have noted before, it would be good for them to repeal the ban on the incandescent buld, and regulations that limit the size of our toilet tanks. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I suspect both those would be popular moves with the majority of Americans (even if they might not get a majority of votes among people who read the NY Times with their breakfast every day).
Might it also be possible to make some moves against political correctness and related things? Could Congress require all schools that take federal funds not to have speech codes? Could they require that the difference between candidates admitted via affirmative action (and perhas legacy and athletic friendly admissions as well) not exceed, on average 5% on standardized tests?
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I suspec that most Americans think that diversity training is an expensive joke, and a waste of time. Would it be possible to change the underlying laws that lead businesses to have such training? Perhaps the law could stress the obligation of employers not to discriminate based on race, sex, etc., but also include a finding indicating that in a free society we have the right to offend each other, and that disciminiation requires much more than offensive speech or behavior. (It might be that the law technically allows that, but the common interpretation, and company policies that follow it, are often less open to free speech. Perhaps Congress could try to fix that).
Lawyers, particularly trial lawyers are not popular. Are there any actions that Congress could do to make it harder to create class action lawsuits?
Could Congress legislate against the finding in Kelo, at least as it applies to federal takings. Relatedly, could Congress expand the legal definition of a regulatory taking? If memory serves, Congress did something after Kelo, but it was relatively weak.
Could Congress legislate against disparate impact? (Has this issue been polled? If asked, would most Americans think that it is reasonable? I suspect most Americans would want proof of actual discriminiation in a particular case, and not a mere statistical correlation).
Those are just a few ideas dashed off quickly. Not sure if they're on target, but it's worth thinking about. The legislature is Article I, pace Joe Biden, because it was supposed to be the most important branch, and the House of Representatives is first in that section because it's closest to the people. It would be good to see Congress following public opinion on some of these issues. The House, of course, does not make law on its own. There are higher, and hopefully more thoughtful branches, that can refine the raw ideas put forth in Congress. But the House is where things are supposed to start, not the regularory bureaucracy, where some of these laws, regulations, and interpretations have come from.