Full Version: Congressional Job Approval Rating
According to a Real Clear Politics averaging, congress is disapproved by over 3 in 5 Americans, with an approval rating under 1 in 4. (RCP average was 24.7% approval)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/archive/?poll_id=18
This includes Fox News, CBS News, and the LA Times. The Gallup Polling data shows it at even lower.
The President has even higher ratings, with an average (regardless of polling source) above 30.
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
That being said. Here are my questions for debate.
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
2. What promises have the Democrats made good on during their time?
3. What are the Democrats working on that hasn't been accomplished?
4. What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/archive/?poll_id=18
This includes Fox News, CBS News, and the LA Times. The Gallup Polling data shows it at even lower.
The President has even higher ratings, with an average (regardless of polling source) above 30.
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
That being said. Here are my questions for debate.
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
2. What promises have the Democrats made good on during their time?
3. What are the Democrats working on that hasn't been accomplished?
4. What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
Nice try aevans176, but you are overlooking a couple of things.
First, that the Congressional Republicans have to be factored into this equation, just as do the Democratic majority.
Second, if you scroll down to the bottom of this real Clear Politics like, you will see than in “Generic Congressional Vote” Democrats are ahead of Republicans by 10.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Nice try aevans176, but you are overlooking a couple of things.
First, that the Congressional Republicans have to be factored into this equation, just as do the Democratic majority.
Second, if you scroll down to the bottom of this real Clear Politics like, you will see than in “Generic Congressional Vote” Democrats are ahead of Republicans by 10.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Oct 30 2007, 02:42 PM) 
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
2. What promises have the Democrats made good on during their time?
3. What are the Democrats working on that hasn't been accomplished?
4. What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
Simple, really. Americans are not happy because nothing gets done. Nobody likes "do-nothing Congress". Americans, by and large, want significant reforms - in our foreign policy, in our healthcare, etc. etc. Conservatives, by definition, don't want changes - this is the definition of conservatism. We have enough conservatives in both houses to stall any new bills to get passed through and overwrite presidential veto.
Hopefully this will change in a year, and Democrats will have enough of a majority in both houses to push reforms through. And, who knows, maybe we won't even need to have a veto-proof majority anyway.
Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
Congressional job approval has been in a steady, unwavering decline since the end of 2001 - apart from a slight blip following the 2006 election. One might better ask why that blip occurred. Presumably, the electorate imagined that a slight Democratic majority in the House and a majority of one in the Senate (and even that includes Sen. Lieberman) meant that Congress would suddenly start reversing years of bad policy - much of which is irreversible. Those making such assumptions were clearly wrong - as anyone who's followed the Democratic Party for the past decade or so could readily have told them.
I would imagine that the occupation of Iraq would be a major factor. Certainly a lot of the pre-election buzz centered on opposition to pursuing the Iraqi adventure. As it has transpired that Congress cannot or will not overrule decisions by the Bush administration, Congress as a whole is being blamed. There is little that they can actually do with a strong opposition and an executive that's as flexible as a boulder, which probably makes little difference to the average citizen. But there is much that they could be doing - and aren't. And, for that, they deserve even less approval. All in all, I'd say the figures are more than fair.
What promises have the Democrats made good on during their time?
I don't know. What "promises" has the Democratic Party made recently (assuming that "during their time" you mean "in the past eight months or so")? None that I know of. There was a lot of misplaced faith in the Democrats' will or ability to do anything to reverse the disastrous policies that Congress has been endorsing for the past five years or so, but I have no idea what this faith was based on. Certainly not their past record or recent efforts.
What are the Democrats working on that hasn't been accomplished?
It's hard to tell what they've been "working on". It has clearly not been using a "nuclear option" to defeat any of the recent Republican filibusters. It has not been anything that would have enough bipartisan support to override a presidential veto or appeal to enough moderate (or even sane) Congressional Republicans. It has not been using any of the tools that might be at their disposal to effect a meaningful change in anything. So far as I can make out, the only thing they've been actively or successfully "working on" would better be accomplished at home - on their own, late at night, sitting in front of their computers with a tube of KY to prevent chafing.
What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
Well, the skills, experience, and will to do a good job would loom large, barrier-wise. So would an opposition party that doesn't want a "Democrat controlled Congress" to be able to take credit for anything that might appeal to a majority of Americans. So would an Executive that hasn't given a damn what the American people might need or desire since it took office - and which shows no sign of ever giving such a damn.
Your observation that "the President has even higher ratings" is a classic of spin, though, aevans. Maybe you meant "even the president has higher ratings". But what you're really saying is that his ratings are not quite so desperately low as Congress'. The Congress is frequently well ahead of a president or well behind a president in national polling. But no president in US history has been this consistently unpopular for such a long period of time. The fact that President Bush's numbers are not quite so pathetically horrible as Congress' at the moment is hardly a recommendation. Though you are probably correct if you're assuming that Congress' failure to do anything to curb Bush's policies is a major contributing factor to the even lower esteem in which they are currently held. There may well be a sense that a dangerous child may not be able to help himself - and that we should blame the parents for failing to address their destructive behavior.
Congressional job approval has been in a steady, unwavering decline since the end of 2001 - apart from a slight blip following the 2006 election. One might better ask why that blip occurred. Presumably, the electorate imagined that a slight Democratic majority in the House and a majority of one in the Senate (and even that includes Sen. Lieberman) meant that Congress would suddenly start reversing years of bad policy - much of which is irreversible. Those making such assumptions were clearly wrong - as anyone who's followed the Democratic Party for the past decade or so could readily have told them.
I would imagine that the occupation of Iraq would be a major factor. Certainly a lot of the pre-election buzz centered on opposition to pursuing the Iraqi adventure. As it has transpired that Congress cannot or will not overrule decisions by the Bush administration, Congress as a whole is being blamed. There is little that they can actually do with a strong opposition and an executive that's as flexible as a boulder, which probably makes little difference to the average citizen. But there is much that they could be doing - and aren't. And, for that, they deserve even less approval. All in all, I'd say the figures are more than fair.
What promises have the Democrats made good on during their time?
I don't know. What "promises" has the Democratic Party made recently (assuming that "during their time" you mean "in the past eight months or so")? None that I know of. There was a lot of misplaced faith in the Democrats' will or ability to do anything to reverse the disastrous policies that Congress has been endorsing for the past five years or so, but I have no idea what this faith was based on. Certainly not their past record or recent efforts.
What are the Democrats working on that hasn't been accomplished?
It's hard to tell what they've been "working on". It has clearly not been using a "nuclear option" to defeat any of the recent Republican filibusters. It has not been anything that would have enough bipartisan support to override a presidential veto or appeal to enough moderate (or even sane) Congressional Republicans. It has not been using any of the tools that might be at their disposal to effect a meaningful change in anything. So far as I can make out, the only thing they've been actively or successfully "working on" would better be accomplished at home - on their own, late at night, sitting in front of their computers with a tube of KY to prevent chafing.
What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
Well, the skills, experience, and will to do a good job would loom large, barrier-wise. So would an opposition party that doesn't want a "Democrat controlled Congress" to be able to take credit for anything that might appeal to a majority of Americans. So would an Executive that hasn't given a damn what the American people might need or desire since it took office - and which shows no sign of ever giving such a damn.
Your observation that "the President has even higher ratings" is a classic of spin, though, aevans. Maybe you meant "even the president has higher ratings". But what you're really saying is that his ratings are not quite so desperately low as Congress'. The Congress is frequently well ahead of a president or well behind a president in national polling. But no president in US history has been this consistently unpopular for such a long period of time. The fact that President Bush's numbers are not quite so pathetically horrible as Congress' at the moment is hardly a recommendation. Though you are probably correct if you're assuming that Congress' failure to do anything to curb Bush's policies is a major contributing factor to the even lower esteem in which they are currently held. There may well be a sense that a dangerous child may not be able to help himself - and that we should blame the parents for failing to address their destructive behavior.
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
Easy. When the Democrats took back control of the House under Pelosi, they did not represent a liberal majority. The Southern Democrats who won House races are trying desperately to maintain their position, and that means voting against legislation that San Francisco liberals embrace. The Democrats have not been able to accomplish any of their goals, except raising the minimum wage. They have not been helped by Congressional Republicans, but it takes two to tango. Looks like the Democrats are no different than the Repubs despite their call to a more consensus based legislature.
Easy. When the Democrats took back control of the House under Pelosi, they did not represent a liberal majority. The Southern Democrats who won House races are trying desperately to maintain their position, and that means voting against legislation that San Francisco liberals embrace. The Democrats have not been able to accomplish any of their goals, except raising the minimum wage. They have not been helped by Congressional Republicans, but it takes two to tango. Looks like the Democrats are no different than the Repubs despite their call to a more consensus based legislature.
QUOTE
2. What promises have the Democrats made good on during their time?
QUOTE
3. What are the Democrats working on that hasn't been accomplished?
They have passed important bills regarding raising the minimum wage, ethics reform, the America COMPETES Act, a homeland security provision relating to securing our transportation system and first responder training. They also passed important bills relating to stem cell research and children's health care, only to be obstructed by a president who ranks fourth all time in regards to deficit spending.
QUOTE
4. What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
The largest barrier the democrats face is the roadblock republicans. In the senate, democrats have faced thirteen cloture motions, while the 108th and 109th faced a grand total of four. The long and documented role of republican obstructionism is by far, the the largest impediment to progress.
Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
Simple – they are doing lots of “investigations” and other partisan political nonsense but getting little else done and imo this will continue well into 2008.
Its all about who can make the other guy “look bad” – so both sides are wrong and the American people are paying the price.
4. What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
Define quality job? Murtha is now the KING of the earmarks – is that progress – or “quality”? When we pass a spending bill for the war (which the Dems want to stop to save money) you can be sure they will tack on 24 billion or so – just to “save” the taxpayers money?
Simple – they are doing lots of “investigations” and other partisan political nonsense but getting little else done and imo this will continue well into 2008.
Its all about who can make the other guy “look bad” – so both sides are wrong and the American people are paying the price.
4. What barriers to doing a quality job do the Democrats in congress face?
Define quality job? Murtha is now the KING of the earmarks – is that progress – or “quality”? When we pass a spending bill for the war (which the Dems want to stop to save money) you can be sure they will tack on 24 billion or so – just to “save” the taxpayers money?
President Bush as Harry Truman vs the Do Nothing Congress? 
This meme in waiting has been filtering into right wing radio lately. The GOP has little to work with coming into the elections and Bush will cause further damage as he goes merrily along doing as he whims (immunity for Blackwater hasn't begun to play out yet). Some have already recognized the coming attempt change the public view on the current congress and try and manufacture a media image.
Should be amusing.
The Democrats in their own bumbling way will probably walk right into this one. But you would deserve your fate if this lame and unimaginative attempt to reframe works.
Well TED, I may not care much for democrats but i hope Waxman and his investigations put a great many persons in jail and tumble more than a few companies. Not quite the bullet to the head i think some deserve, but I'll take what I can.
This meme in waiting has been filtering into right wing radio lately. The GOP has little to work with coming into the elections and Bush will cause further damage as he goes merrily along doing as he whims (immunity for Blackwater hasn't begun to play out yet). Some have already recognized the coming attempt change the public view on the current congress and try and manufacture a media image.
Should be amusing.
The Democrats in their own bumbling way will probably walk right into this one. But you would deserve your fate if this lame and unimaginative attempt to reframe works.
QUOTE
Simple – they are doing lots of “investigations” and other partisan political nonsense but getting little else done and imo this will continue well into 2008.
Well TED, I may not care much for democrats but i hope Waxman and his investigations put a great many persons in jail and tumble more than a few companies. Not quite the bullet to the head i think some deserve, but I'll take what I can.
QUOTE(BoF @ Oct 30 2007, 04:59 PM)
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
Nice try aevans176, but you are overlooking a couple of things.
First, that the Congressional Republicans have to be factored into this equation, just as do the Democratic majority.
Second, if you scroll down to the bottom of this real Clear Politics like, you will see than in “Generic Congressional Vote” Democrats are ahead of Republicans by 10.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Nice try aevans176, but you are overlooking a couple of things.
First, that the Congressional Republicans have to be factored into this equation, just as do the Democratic majority.
Second, if you scroll down to the bottom of this real Clear Politics like, you will see than in “Generic Congressional Vote” Democrats are ahead of Republicans by 10.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Rock on BOF. Not debating a darn thing I see.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1339
QUOTE
(from Zogby)
While Bush’s job approval rating has stabilized, opinion of the work Congress is doing continues to plummet. The Zogby poll shows just 14% give Congress positive marks, while 83% give it negative marks – this in the wake of an acrimonious scrimmage over immigration reform that failed to pass muster in the Senate and died, experts have said, until after the 2008 presidential election.
A Zogby Interactive survey in the midst of the wrangling over that bill showed Congress’ job approval rating specifically in its handling of immigration reform stood at just 3%, while Bush’s rating on the same subject stood at 9%.
The Democratic Congress gets poor marks across the ideological spectrum – just 21% of liberals and 10% of the very liberal give it positive marks, while 14% of conservatives and 14% of the very conservative give it positive ratings. Among Democrats, just 19% give Congress positive marks, compared to 13% of Republicans and 8% of political independents.
By way of comparison, the Republican Congress had a 23% positive job approval rating last October, just a week before voters tossed the GOP out of their leadership posts in both houses.
While Bush’s job approval rating has stabilized, opinion of the work Congress is doing continues to plummet. The Zogby poll shows just 14% give Congress positive marks, while 83% give it negative marks – this in the wake of an acrimonious scrimmage over immigration reform that failed to pass muster in the Senate and died, experts have said, until after the 2008 presidential election.
A Zogby Interactive survey in the midst of the wrangling over that bill showed Congress’ job approval rating specifically in its handling of immigration reform stood at just 3%, while Bush’s rating on the same subject stood at 9%.
The Democratic Congress gets poor marks across the ideological spectrum – just 21% of liberals and 10% of the very liberal give it positive marks, while 14% of conservatives and 14% of the very conservative give it positive ratings. Among Democrats, just 19% give Congress positive marks, compared to 13% of Republicans and 8% of political independents.
By way of comparison, the Republican Congress had a 23% positive job approval rating last October, just a week before voters tossed the GOP out of their leadership posts in both houses.
Data is everywhere stating that people aren't happy with the democrats. Come on sir. Post something meaningful.
http://www.zogby.com/features/featuredtables.dbm?ID=155
According to this Zogby polling data, the "poor" column for congress has gone from roughly 31% last year to 43% last year.
I believe that people get tired of the hand-wrining that congress has evolved to. What do they really do anyway?
I also believe that the democrats or moderates that voted them in expected something. Something that hasn't happened. No movement in Iraq, no changes for the better on immigration, etc.
Par for the course I'd suppose.
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Oct 31 2007, 08:39 AM)
QUOTE(BoF @ Oct 30 2007, 04:59 PM)
1. Why is the Congressional Approval Rating, 10 mos into the Democrats tenure, so low?
Nice try aevans176, but you are overlooking a couple of things.
First, that the Congressional Republicans have to be factored into this equation, just as do the Democratic majority.
Second, if you scroll down to the bottom of this real Clear Politics like, you will see than in “Generic Congressional Vote” Democrats are ahead of Republicans by 10.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Nice try aevans176, but you are overlooking a couple of things.
First, that the Congressional Republicans have to be factored into this equation, just as do the Democratic majority.
Second, if you scroll down to the bottom of this real Clear Politics like, you will see than in “Generic Congressional Vote” Democrats are ahead of Republicans by 10.7%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Rock on BOF. Not debating a darn thing I see.
Oh yes I am. I am saying that the dissatisfaction with Congress is across the board, not just Democrats. If you can't "see" that, you may need to have your eyes checked. When the Democrats expand their numbers in Congress in 2008, the picture might become clearer. I'm going to remember and call it to your attention in 13 months. In other words, get ready to have your nose rubbed in it.
QUOTE
Oh yes I am. I am saying that the dissatisfaction with Congress is across the board, not just Democrats. If you can't "see" that, you may need to have your eyes checked. When the Democrats expand their numbers in Congress in 2008, the picture might become clearer. I'm going to remember and call it to your attention in 13 months. In other words, get ready to have your nose rubbed in it.
Correct and it has gone down not up since Democrats took over “ready to rule” as Nancy told us. And what have they done? BIG earmarks and revelation of corruption in contracts for Iraq. Lots of partisan “investigations” that imo the electorate sees through and is really sick of.
Not better is it.
QUOTE
Correct and it has gone down not up since Democrats took over “ready to rule” as Nancy told us. And what have they done? BIG earmarks and revelation of corruption in contracts for Iraq. Lots of partisan “investigations” that imo the electorate sees through and is really sick of.
What evidence is there that dissatisfaction is due to investigations?
I don't think the average American had a problem with Alberto Gonzales sweating, retreating, and backtracking faster than he could speak.
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 7 2007, 06:47 PM)
QUOTE
Oh yes I am. I am saying that the dissatisfaction with Congress is across the board, not just Democrats. If you can't "see" that, you may need to have your eyes checked. When the Democrats expand their numbers in Congress in 2008, the picture might become clearer. I'm going to remember and call it to your attention in 13 months. In other words, get ready to have your nose rubbed in it.
Correct and it has gone down not up since Democrats took over “ready to rule” as Nancy told us. And what have they done? BIG earmarks and revelation of corruption in contracts for Iraq. Lots of partisan “investigations” that imo the electorate sees through and is really sick of.
Not better is it.
Ted, if you are going to quote me, please provide a link, so people don't have to go back and find who you are debating.
QUOTE
Asked to rank the top one or two reasons for their disapproval of Congress, 44 percent say they are tired of Democrats and Republicans fighting with each other, 36 percent say Congress doesn’t seem to get that much done, and 34 percent say members are corrupt and unethical.
How will that anger play out in November’s midterm elections? Forty-five percent of registered voters say they prefer Democrats controlling Congress, compared with 39 percent who say they want Republicans in charge.
How will that anger play out in November’s midterm elections? Forty-five percent of registered voters say they prefer Democrats controlling Congress, compared with 39 percent who say they want Republicans in charge.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12499923/
A recent NBC/WSJ poll confirms that people are tired of both parties, yet they still prefer Democrats by 6%.
If you respond to this, pleae provide some evidence to the contrary.
QUOTE(BoF @ Nov 7 2007, 08:43 PM)
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 7 2007, 06:47 PM)
QUOTE
Oh yes I am. I am saying that the dissatisfaction with Congress is across the board, not just Democrats. If you can't "see" that, you may need to have your eyes checked. When the Democrats expand their numbers in Congress in 2008, the picture might become clearer. I'm going to remember and call it to your attention in 13 months. In other words, get ready to have your nose rubbed in it.
Correct and it has gone down not up since Democrats took over “ready to rule” as Nancy told us. And what have they done? BIG earmarks and revelation of corruption in contracts for Iraq. Lots of partisan “investigations” that imo the electorate sees through and is really sick of.
Not better is it.
Ted, if you are going to quote me, please provide a link, so people don't have to go back and find who you are debating.
QUOTE
Asked to rank the top one or two reasons for their disapproval of Congress, 44 percent say they are tired of Democrats and Republicans fighting with each other, 36 percent say Congress doesn’t seem to get that much done, and 34 percent say members are corrupt and unethical.
How will that anger play out in November’s midterm elections? Forty-five percent of registered voters say they prefer Democrats controlling Congress, compared with 39 percent who say they want Republicans in charge.
How will that anger play out in November’s midterm elections? Forty-five percent of registered voters say they prefer Democrats controlling Congress, compared with 39 percent who say they want Republicans in charge.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12499923/
A recent NBC/WSJ poll confirms that people are tired of both parties, yet they still prefer Democrats by 6%.
If you respond to this, pleae provide some evidence to the contrary.
If you respond to this, pleae provide some evidence to the contrary.
6 % is meaningless at this point. Most surveys have an error of +_ 4%. The selection of candidates and the run-up top the election will be where and when the surveys will mean more.
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 7 2007, 07:50 PM)
6 % is meaningless at this point. Most surveys have an error of +_ 4%. The selection of candidates and the run-up top the election will be where and when the surveys will mean more.
If you check, this one had a margin of error closer to 3%. If this is meaningless, then why did aevans176 start the thread and why are you replying?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12499741/
QUOTE(BoF @ Nov 7 2007, 08:57 PM)
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 7 2007, 07:50 PM)
6 % is meaningless at this point. Most surveys have an error of +_ 4%. The selection of candidates and the run-up top the election will be where and when the surveys will mean more.
If you check, this one had a margin of error closer to 3%. If this is meaningless, then why did aevans176 start the thread and why are you replying?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12499741/
I don’t know why he started the thread sir – ask him.. I gave you my opinion – that is the best it can do.
3.1 % to be exact and brings it to a draw. in my book
This topic looks simple on the surface, but you have to dig a bit deeper before you really under cover what is at stake here. For one, the GOP scandals have tarnished the image of the house. Ted Stevens, John Doolittle, Mark Foley, and Larry Craig are prime examples of how independents are turned off to congress. Now that the congress is in democratic hands, it's easy to see how a large number of republicans would naturally be in league with turned off independents. Add to that mix, the fact that democrats who don't feel the leadership has pushed the envelope about the war, and the low numbers make sense. the low numbers are not because the democrats are running the show, it's because voter "throw the bums out" feelings of anger spreads across governmental institutions, not parties or single individuals. As my hyperlinked story points out, the answer isn't necessarily what you see on the surface after you dig a bit deeper. 
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 8 2007, 09:28 PM)
3.1 % to be exact and brings it to a draw. in my book
You must be using "new math."
If the Democrats have a 6% lead and the margin of error is 3.1%, that means the lead for the Democrats is between:
6-3.1=2.9
and
6+3.1=9.1
So, with this margin of error the lead for the Democrats is possibly as little as 2.9% and possibly as great as 9.1%.
The only place that's a tie is in "your book."
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.