The secretary of the Treasury has historically been an administration's pre-eminent economic policy maker. The Treasury department has authority over virtually every corner of the economy, and access to a large and gifted staff.

Resident Scholar Kevin A. Hassett

The person who sits atop the organization can wield an enormous amount of influence over regulation and legislation.

When things go well, a Treasury secretary can achieve a public stature reserved for the very few. President Clinton's second Treasury secretary, Robert Rubin, is widely regarded as having been enormously successful and is to this day perhaps the most influential economic figure in the Democratic party.

When things don't go well, Treasury secretaries can disappear into obscurity and become the subjects of scorn and ridicule.

Secretary John Snow, who is expected to end his tenure at the Treasury next month, hasn't been, if you believe the press clippings, a successful secretary. Is the press being fair? How can you tell if a Treasury secretary is any good?

Any worker wants to be evaluated on his or her accomplishments and responsibilities. For the Treasury secretary, the job is to generate economic policy ideas, provide support for legislative efforts, and improve the business climate.

If you take the time to evaluate Snow on those criteria, he comes off a lot better than he's been portrayed in the press and by the perfunctory praise offered by administration officials.

Tax Successes

On tax policy, his tenure has been marked with repeated legislative successes. The sweeping reductions of dividend and capital-gains taxes of 2003 were followed by successful extensions of previous cuts, along with a major international tax bill.

Admittedly, aside from the 2003 changes, one could argue that the tax bills have been tinkering rather than significant reform. That may be, but it was politically challenging tinkering.

If the president had experienced ringing defeats in this area, I would be sympathetic to the view that his Treasury secretary had failed him. On taxes, however, one would have to concede that he accomplished what he set out to.

Treasury's successes under Snow didn't stop there. Sure, I have been disappointed that tax reforms haven't been more aggressive. But is that only the Treasury's fault? Clearly not. Indeed, one could argue that the Treasury has been more of an intellectual leader in the past few years than it has been in some time.

Seminal Report

First, Snow and his staff provided guidance and technical support for the president's tax panel. That body's report, if not an immediate political success, was an intellectual one that will guide tax policy discussions (and graduate seminars) for years to come.

If I were Treasury secretary, and that report was written on my watch, I would point to it with pride.

The Treasury also began the use of dynamic scoring on Snow's watch. The tax staff has developed complicated economic models that estimate the impact on the overall economy of specific tax proposals and adjust revenue projections accordingly. Dynamic scoring has been something of a holy grail for Republicans, and Snow, the Ph.D. economist, helped make it happen.

Snow also should receive high marks on regulation. He has sought more aggressive oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and took a leadership role in developing language that helped create a consensus on the Senate Banking Committee for a reform bill last year.

Economic Success

He also has managed the non-legislative nuances of the tax job well. Just last week, he scrapped an outdated long-distance telephone tax, initially passed to help fund the Spanish-American War.

So legislation passed, and regulations improved.

How about the acid test: the economy? While no single individual, including the president or Treasury secretary, should be credited for a good or bad economy, the state of the economy during a Treasury secretary's reign will certainly affect perceptions of his effectiveness.

By this measure, Snow is also in rare company. During his stay at Treasury, the economy has posted real growth, on average, of 3.98 percent per year. That number is virtually identical to the 3.99 percent average growth during Secretary Rubin's tenure, and well above the average economic growth associated with any other secretary of the last 25 years.

Credit to Bush

So why is the public perception of Snow so different from that of Rubin? My guess is that the public relations problem lies not with Snow, but with President George W. Bush. Rubin worked for a president who often shared the limelight with his cabinet members, and regularly played up the importance of their views. Indeed, he allowed his team to have public views and to discuss them and establish their own expertise.

For the Bush team, the process is much more carefully scripted. The White House message is that the president is to be credited for all things good, and everyone on the team is on message. It's hard to imagine how Rubin, or even Alexander Hamilton, could shine in this administration. There is, after all, only one ``decider.''

So if Snow does depart next month, I, for one, will be very sorry to see him go. When history hands down its marks for Bush administration officials, Snow will be one of the few to have deserved an A.

Kevin A. Hassett is a resident scholar and director of economic policy studies at AEI.