Congress Still Pathetic

That is a PERFECT Onion headline! The Onion is getting a lot politics right these days. A link maybe?

When they're on "vacation", nothing that gets done will get its procedural formalities taken care of. That's not the same thing.

But didn't LBJ have like 67 Dems?

You're right, of course. I googled "filibuster proof majority" to try to see when the last one was, but I didn't look at enough of the results. You're also right about the intra-party division, though, so whatever source I paraphrased wasn't completely off base. Still embarrassing.

Ahhhh Now I see what you are saying..

Yes, I agree... This country has become infinitely more divided and infinitely more mean-spirited in the last decade...

Michale

I salute you for being honest. I mean, can you name one positive thing (by whatever definition you use) that Congress has done since the 2014 midterm election?

One? Again -- even by your definition?

dsws -

I hear your point, but my point is that when they're on vacation, it's 100% guaranteed nothing will get done. When they're there, there is a more-than-zero chance. Not much better, but there it is.

Nowadays, Congress only really gets things done right before (or sometimes right after) deadlines. That's why they keep setting up artificial ones -- like the 3-month highway deadline they just voted in.

nypoet22 [4] -

Nice quote. Very apt.

Michale [5] -

Um, don't you mean 2010 and 2014? I personally would pick different years...

Heh.

Teacher1941 [6] -

"Government doesn't work -- elect us and we'll PROVE it!"

Heh.

dsws [8] -

Excellent point.

Michale [9] -

Oh, OK. Although Dems started their takeover in 2006, and I always wondered what Congress would look like 2 years after Rush's 2112...

"We have assumed control.
We have assumed control.
We have assumed control."

:-)

dsws [10] -

Again, I largely agree. But didn't LBJ have like 67 Dems? Of course, there were massive intraparty divisions back then, but I thought he had an enormous majority, at least in the Senate.

-CW

Anyway, voters are not demanding that members of Congress work together across the aisle. They may say it in polls, if the question is phrased right, but they're not demanding it at the ballot box. That's what I'm saying.

That's how the system works -- for both parties.

The Democrats have plenty of economic conservatives, but virtually no social-conservative wing. The Republicans have essentially no liberal wing, on either economic or cultural issues. That's because the votes that decide elections are cast in primaries, where only a tiny percentage of the electorate turns out to vote. And it's a tiny percentage that values ideological purity.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2013-vote-ratings/the-chasm-in-the-center-of-congress-20140206

Democrats did nominally have the requisite 60 members in their Senate caucus, from July 7 (Franken's legal challenge finally resolved) to August 25, 2009 (Ted Kennedy's death). That was the period of "complete control", actually requiring absolute unanimity within the caucus and the attendance of two members who were on the brink of death. Senate procedure allows substantial opportunity for the minority party to slow things down, even when they can't actually block it.

There basically was no "complete control". Neither party has had it since FDR.

I don't know WHAT you are saying...

Michale

Reelection rates:

House 2008 94%
House 2014 95%
Senate 2008 83%
Senate 2014 82%
https://www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/reelect.php

You were saying?

Yea, cuz DEMOCRATS are all about productivity in service to the American people, right?? :^/

Michale

We did that in 2008 and in 2014....

What changed???

Michale

in other words...

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

~Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

So why on earth would we care whether they're on "vacation" from the formal sessions? Why would we think that the status of an ongoing non-event in the chambers could possibly have anything to do with the reasons why the actual events of drafting and negotiation of bills in offices are yielding nothing?

The votes aren't there, for anything worthwhile. If members of Congress were reciting canned speeches for CSPAN instead of talking to lobbyists, staffers, and each other, the votes still wouldn't be there. On the other hand, if the electorate were inclined to show up each November and vot out incumbents when nothing gets done, that would make some bills get passed.

I had hoped they would have been able to actually get things done, with the occasional STICK IT TO THE DEMS action on the side.. :(

But it seems that they were all talk in their opposition to Obama and the Democrat policies..

Hell, they even jumped into bed with Obama on that trade abortion...

VERY disappointing...

Michale

When all else fails.. Do nothing.. :^(

Michale