/p/
Toledo Talk forums search sign-up login

57% Would Like to Replace Entire Congress

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress

If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.

Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.

There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it's not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.

Republicans, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly support replacing everyone in the Congress. Their views have not changed. But Republican voters are disenchanted with their team as much as the Congress itself: 69% of GOP Voters say Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the party base.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) now believe that members of Congress are overpaid. That’s up 10 percentage points from last October. Just five percent (5%) think their Congress member is paid too little. Thirty percent (30%) think the pay is about right.

One reason for this attitude may be that most voters say they understand the health care legislation better than Congress. Just 22% think the legislature has a good understanding of the issue. Three-out-of-four (74%) trust their own economic judgment more than Congress’.

Just 14% give Congress good or excellent review for their overall performance, while only 16% believe it’s Very Likely that Congress will address the most important problems facing our nation. Seventy-five percent (75%) say members of Congress are more interested in their own careers than they are in helping people. On the brighter side, just 37% say most in Congress have extramarital affairs.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans believe that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. Most believe that’s why politicians are able to solicit contributions from business leaders. Most, however, say it’s generally a good investment because political donors get more than their money’s worth. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American adults say political donors get more than their money back in terms of favors from members of Congress.

Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets reelected every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses. One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”

Voters have a different perspective, and 50% say 'rigged' election rules explain high reelection rate for Congress.

When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.

In the 20th century, turnover began to decline. As power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer and fewer members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, congressional turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever, and it has remained very low ever since.

created by Ahuvia on Aug 30, 2009 at 09:11:06 am     Politics     Comments: 11

source      versions

Comments ... #

Sadly, too many people are making too much money and are way too powerful under the current system. Therefore, it would take almost a revolution to make a significant change.

posted by hockeyfan on Aug 30, 2009 at 10:10:42 am     #  

The Ruling class, and they just lost the earl of Mass.

posted by Linecrosser on Aug 30, 2009 at 11:47:15 am     #  

When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every election cycle.

They also wanted representation to be true service, and not a way to become rich and powerful. They debated whether representatives should be paid at all...

posted by billy on Aug 30, 2009 at 12:35:07 pm     #  

You can cut there pay, but they'll just take more under the table.

posted by thetoledowire_com on Aug 30, 2009 at 12:45:14 pm     #  

We desperately need across the board term limits. Too many people are too stupid to vote out the same old same old scumbags.

The longer they are in office the more opportunity for them to turn crooked.

posted by JeepMaker on Aug 30, 2009 at 02:25:31 pm     #  

I'd like to see turnover at the local level first.

How about those so-called term limits on Toledo City Council? Rob Ludeman served 12 years on Toledo City Council, and he was term-limited out as a District 2 rep. But he's allowed to run this fall as an at-large member. So in theory, he could serve 24 years on Toledo City Council even though we're led to belive the term limit is 12 years. Great scheme or scam.

Copeland, Sarantou, Ludeman, and McNamara will get re-elected to Toledo City Council this fall. Keep the status quo because it has worked so well for Toledo in the past.

I believe Sarantou is seeking his third term and McNamara his second and Copeland his second or third term. Phil Copeland will probably run again as his dead uncle.

"If they think I'm Bill Copeland, that's fine with me."

Former Toledo Public School Board member Steve Steel was appointed to city council this summer. Typical Toledo politics progression. And I'm sure Steel will remain on council after this November. Brilliant!

posted by jr on Aug 30, 2009 at 02:47:53 pm     #  

After Einstein made his famous quote about the definition of insanity, a student who was still confused asked the great man for an example.

"Go lookit fuckin' Toledo Ohio!" he answered

(sarcasm)

posted by billy on Aug 30, 2009 at 02:52:32 pm     #  

That's a strange number, 57 percent, because there have not been over 57 percent turnout of eligible voters since 1968! This may mean that there are many who will gladly answer a telephone survey. yet won't take the time to vote when it really counts. I'd like to see the statistics on the "telly poll" itself to see if they had any verifiable way of determining if the person answering the phone was indeed a registered voter, or one who even votes at all.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

Further reading at the Rasmussen site shows that it was a telephone survey of 1000 likely voters. Whatever that means?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/toplines/pt_survey_toplines/august_2009/toplines_congress_august_27_28_2009

posted by Bbcmjeep43 on Aug 30, 2009 at 03:26:49 pm     #  

Terms limits definitely need to get rolled out for US Reps. Also agree with the whole stupid "At-Large" city council seats...it just allows for recycled politicians to keep collecting money while providing nothing new to get the area moving forward. City Council should be 8-12 years for a lifetime (for any and all positions).

posted by JustaSooner on Aug 30, 2009 at 05:44:06 pm     #  

Oh forgot to type the=is...the whole "57% want a new congress" thing...how many of those would also respond "Oh, but my congressperson is fine - it is everyone else." That is why there will never be a mass turnover in Congress.

posted by JustaSooner on Aug 30, 2009 at 05:45:01 pm     #  

Exactly, Justa.

As for term limits, I understand why some may think they are a good way to keep representatives (in any elected office) from becoming entrenched.

However, I feel that they also limit my ability to vote for the candidate I want. If my rep is doing a good job, representing my interests and the way I vote, why term-limit the person out?

posted by Anniecski on Aug 31, 2009 at 12:29:45 pm     #  

Login or create an account to post a comment.