President-elect Barack Obama has an economic plan for an industrial energy future, manufacturing windmills, turbines, solar panels and other energy technologies, for example.

Yet the government’s treatment of industry – namely the Big 3 automakers over a $25 billion bailout – shows skepticism in its restorative ability. Some actually suggest punishing automakers by withholding government help.

This doesn’t square. If manufacturing and industry are the future, shouldn’t they be the present, too?

Obama’s plan would essentially foster another automotive industry: a national manufacturing presence, employing millions, asserting American ingenuity and creating products identified with U.S. superiority.

The harsh road through Congress for the Big 3, however, is symbolic of difficulties U.S. manufacturing as a whole has experienced. American industry has not only lost capital, jobs and output, but also confidence in its aptitude.

Breakthroughs have become scarce, overshadowed by rapid growth and innovation overseas.

Yet it will be manufacturing, ingenuity and American know-how and can-do that gets this country humming again. That’s the message from President-elect Obama: 2.5 million jobs to be created by the new energy industry.

A new industrial revolution, as envisioned by the president-elect, could restore more than economic vitality to communities like Lewiston-Auburn, which once were centers of industry: an identity.

Where things were once made, things could be made again. This is refreshing optimism in these dour times.

But, again, this doesn’t square with what’s now envisioned, or with what’s happening.

The Big 3 have not helped themselves, of course. Their executives are so ignorant of image they took private jets to meet with Congress to ask for money. It’s a wonder they can even sell the cars they make.

They are still America’s pre-eminent industries, though. So the government faces a paradox: Can it support industry as a concept, without supporting industry in reality? In the long run, probably not.

One of the reasons we’ve been against a Detroit bailout is the “who’s next?” question. If automakers are rescued, other troubled industries would queue on Capitol Hill like giddy children waiting to see Santa. (And it wouldn’t matter if they were naughty or nice.)

Yet it’s hard to envision America’s new energy economy thriving, if other major industries enter decline.

So, instead of asking the Big 3 to proffer post-bailout plans, as was done recently, Congress should instead outline conditions that dovetail with the goals of the energy economy. For Detroit, models that are more fuel-efficient and run on a variety of alternatives (like electricity or natural gas) would be good starts.

This approach should quiet concerns about “who’s next,” too, because it would forgo bailouts for partnerships between government and business, toward a vibrant, energy-smart, industrial manufacturing economy that restores confidence in American ingenuity and ability. Sure, this may sound implausible.

Government and industry, working together? Never going to happen.

To us, though, it sounds better than a longer string of bailouts, which certainly could happen.