Democrats took power in January 2007 with a pre-scripted agenda for what they would accomplish in the first 100 legislative hours, but also offering the customary promises about working in a bipartisan fashion to do the nation’s business. At the time, 37% of Republicans and 39% of Democrats approved of the job Congress as a whole was doing. As of October, only 25% of Republicans and 26% of Democrats approve.
The data reviewed above indicate some of the causes for today’s depressed ratings. Of the major issues Congress has wrestled with this session, Iraq and immigration appear to be producing the most flak for congressional Democrats, with a majority of rank-and-file Democrats as well as Republicans generally critical of their job performance. The Democrats’ taking a stand on these issues, and then failing to deliver, has produced substantial bipartisan irritation with Congress.
Their continued failures are noticed and continuing to pass legislation in the house that cannot make it through the Senate shows a couple things... first, the house believes that the number of roll call votes they take can someone make up for not getting any laws enacted, which is their job, and they cannot get these laws enacted because they are not working in a bipartisan manner as they promised to do, so they keep voting, sending things they already know will not make it passed the Senate and nothing gets done.
The Democrats in Congress are attempting to implement their failed strategy once again, this time calling it "The Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act", which they passed with even less support than the last 40 times they tried it.
Roll call is here and it shows that this time 15 Democrats crossed the aisle to vote against the bill, the vote was 218-203, far short of the two-thirds that would be needed to override a Presidential veto, if it made it that far.
Of course it won't because it will never make it through the Senate with the withdrawal language attached, which they Democrats have already admitted to knowing.
Therefore admitting that the whole process was simply a "symbolic gesture"....all on our taxpayers dime.The legislation, passed 218-203, was largely a symbolic jab at Bush, who already has begun reducing force levels but opposes a congressionally mandated timetable on the war. And while the measure was unlikely to pass in the Senate — let alone overcome a presidential veto — Democrats said they wanted voters to know they weren't giving up.
The American public does not want "symbolic gestures", they want legislators to do their job which is "enacting laws", which means they must work in a bipartisan manner on bills that will pass the house, then the Senate and get the president's signature OR have the votes to override a Presidential veto, which they have only done one time.
More from Gallup:
But on four other issues, the public offers more clearly negative assessments. Six in 10 Americans are disappointed or angry with the Democrats’ performance on healthcare and the federal budget deficit. About two-thirds have a negative reaction to their handling of immigration and Iraq.
Out of seven separate issues asked, only two have a combined pleased/neutral ratio that is above the 50% mark.
The latest Gallup Panel survey, conducted Oct. 25-28, 2007, asked Americans to say whether they are “pleased,” “neutral,” “disappointed,” or “angry” about the way the Democrats in Congress have been dealing with seven major issues confronting the nation.
Overall, relatively few Americans are pleased with the Democrats’ performance on any of them. This ranges from 7% for the federal budget deficit to 17% for terrorism. Between 12% and 26% say they are angry about the issues. However, most Americans fall in between, with the plurality generally saying they are disappointed with congressional Democrats’ performance on each.
The question: "As you may know, the Democratic Party gained majority control of Congress in January. How do you feel about the job the Democrats in Congress are doing on each of the following issues -- pleased, neutral, disappointed, or angry?
Terrorism: Only 17% are pleased. 35% are Neutral. 31% Disappointed. 16% Angry.
Economy: Only 12% are pleased. 35% are Neutral. 41% Disappointed. 12% Angry.
Those are the best ratings, the rest go downhill from there.
Government Reform: 12% Pleased. 33% Neutral. 41% Disappointed. 14% Angry.
Healthcare: 12% Pleased. 28% Neutral. 43% Disappointed. 17% Angry.
Iraq: 11% Pleased. 20% Neutral. 43% Diappointed. 25% Angry.
Immigration: 8% Pleased. 27% Neutral. 39% Disappointed. 26% Angry.
Federal Budget Deficit: 7% Pleased. 32% Neutral. 44% Disappointed. 16% Angry.
If this lackluster evaluation of the Democratic Congress were highly partisan -- with Republicans mostly negative and Democrats mostly positive -- the House and Senate leadership could at least be satisfied that it is meeting the expectations of its base supporters. However, that is not the case. Democrats are less negative than Republicans, but they are still somewhat negative about the performance of their own party’s leadership in Congress.
Tapscott shows conservatives the lesson they should learn from this failing Democratically controlled Congress.
There is one more lesson of importance here for conservatives and it is one that ought to give us heart. When your political power depends, as it does for our liberal friends, on promising more and more, but doing so assures that you will be able to actually deliver less and less, you sow the seeds of your own downfall.
The people notice when promises have been made with no ability to keep those promises as the Democrats did before the November elections.
We also notice that Pelosi, whose approval numbers are lower than Bush's, has tried to replace the "enacting laws" job description with "roll call" votes that go nowhere, because she is incapable of working in a bipartisan manner to get legislation passed.
What they do not understand is all their "symbolic" bills and resolutions, that they know they cannot enact into laws because they do not have the votes, are doing, is highlighting their failures for the American public and the world to see.
They are actually setting a stage and standing in the middle of it, in front of a worldwide audience, shining a spotlight on themselves, as they fail over and over again.
They are doing this to prove they are "trying", what they are actually making crystal clear, is that they keep failing.
I wouldn't be so fast to spotlight that fact time and time again because all people remember is that they failed, not that they tried.
It is a blessing in disguise that the Democrats won the majorities in both houses in 2006, because it is has given us, we the people, the ability to see that the Democratic politicians are incapable of working in a bipartisan manner, unable to keep their promises and incompetent in a role of leadership.
Those three words describe the Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid Democratic leadership to a tee: Incapable, unable and incompetent.