I Know How Big Many Are On Performance Numbers Here

[IntenseOperator]

I don't know a thing about the site's M O.....

Congressional Performance
13% Say Congress Doing Good or Excellent Job

Survey of 800 Likely Voters
January 7-8, 2008

Friday, January 11, 2008

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 1% of likely voters give Congress an excellent rating and 12% say the legislature has done a good job. Forty-nine percent (49%) give congress a poor rating (see crosstabs.)

Men are more critical of Congress than women--61% of men give the legislature a poor rating along with 39% of women.

The recent numbers show only a very slight improvement from over the past month. The current ratings for Congress are a bit lower than they were on Election Day 2006. At the time the Democrats won control of the legislature, 15% said Congress was doing a good or an excellent job. Between Election Day and the end of the year, while Republicans were still in control, perceptions of Congress declined even further. They rebounded after the Democrats grabbed the baton in early 2007 and then began to slump again in early summer as the nation watched congressional leaders try to impose an unpopular immigration bill. :scared :scared :scared

Today, only 13% of voters believe Congress has passed legislation that has improved life; 59% disagree. Those numbers have stayed pretty much the same over the last month.

Voters seem to be slightly more optimistic than last month as to whether they believe congress will seriously address important problems, with 39% saying it is at least somewhat likely. However, over half (56%) think it is not likely.

Most voters view congressmen as self-serving rather than as people interested in helping others. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of all voters feel that congressmen are more interested in their own careers. Eighty percent (80%) of Republicans think congressmen hold that view along with 61% of democrats agree.

The Supreme Court earns better ratings than Congress, with 38% giving it a good or excellent rating and 19% who rate it as poor.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ssional_performance/congressional_performance

 

[Chadman]

I wonder how many of these voters are specifically unhappy with democrats, especially considering the razor-thin "majority" that they hold. I wonder how many of these voters are aware of what the Republican razor-thin "minority" is doing to prevent so many things from getting done, which probably leads to much of the frustration about "congress" not getting things done...
--------------------------

Record Breaking: Senate Conservatives Use Filibuster for 62nd Time in This Session of Congress
PRNewsWire News Releases
Published: 12/18/07 08:15 PM EST

New Report Shows How Conservative Minority Rules by Filibuster, Preventing Up or Down Vote on a Record Number of Bills

WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Republican Senate minority today filibustered an omnibus budget bill, setting a modern-day record for blocking the most legislation during a congressional session. A new report released today by the Campaign for America's Future details the 62 times conservatives have used the filibuster to block legislation (or force modification of bills) in the first session of the 110th Congress. In just the first year of this two-year Congress, their use of the filibuster in the Senate topped the previous record, reached during the entire 107th Congress.

The new report outlines every bill filibustered, vetoed or threatened to be vetoed by President Bush. Conservatives filibustered bills to end the occupation of Iraq, provide soldiers in Iraq rest time equal to their deployments, support renewable energy and grant residents of the District of Columbia representation in Congress. Today's record-breaker involved a $516 billion budget package passed by the House to fund the federal government in 2008. The conservative minority demanded $20 billion additional funding for the war and opposed House language to bring troops home, and threatened a filibuster to prevent the bill from getting an up or down vote.

"In just one session, a minority in Congress has prevented a mind-blowing 62 pieces of legislation from going to the floor for an up or down vote," said Campaign for America's Future co-director Roger Hickey. "Our report shows how over and over again, the uncompromising minority has thwarted the will of majorities in Congress and of the American people, holding the Senate floor hostage to a radical right-wing agenda."

Sixty votes are needed to invoke cloture and end a filibuster. The 62nd cloture vote of the session is more than any single session of Congress since at least 1973, the earliest year cloture votes are available online from the Senate. Republicans are on pace to force 134 cloture votes to cut off a filibuster, according to the Campaign for America's Future analysis, more than double the historical average of the last 35 years.

Even pieces of legislation that have made it past the Senate filibuster blockade have been obstructed by President Bush. Last week the President vetoed for the second time a popular bill that would expand health coverage for 10 million American children. According to the Campaign for America's Future report, Bush has threatened to veto 84 bills and has vetoed six as of December 17. In contrast, during the period when the Republicans were in the congressional majority, Bush went the longest time without vetoing a bill since President Arthur Garfield.

Eric Lotke, Campaign for America's Future research director and lead author of the new report, calls the obstruction a "deliberate strategy." He observes that the congressional Republicans block legislation, then blame the Democrats for getting nothing done. "It's like mugging the postman and then complaining that the mail isn't delivered on time."

The story of this historic level of obstruction has recently been covered by The New York Times, but has yet to be fully told in the media. The new Campaign for America's Future report shows how major media outlets describe the 60-vote threshold as an ordinary procedure, neglecting that this tactic is an unprecedented assertion of minority control.

 

[IntenseOperator]

I think the 1st article stated they were unhappy with congress. Just a bit more unhappy since the Dems got a majority.

Don't think it said or inferred anything else.

 

[Chadman]

I agree with you, and that was the point of my question. I wondered (in type) how many of the responders had a clear appreciation of how obstructionistic one half of congress had been during the rating period in question. I neglected to add that in addition to the obstructive tactics, the President also pulled out his veto power to further limit activity.

I assume from your posting history and the part of the story you bolded, and in your retort to my post, that you were in some way trying to forward the point that people are more unsatisfied with congress since the dems took their (slight) majority. I was merely pointing out some reasons that could contribute to the numbers you cited, and a logical explanation of why the dissatisfaction could now be higher.

 

[Spytheweb]

 

[djv]

When you add the prez working with congress it drops to 10%. Seem we can't wait to November. At least we know one problem is gone for good.