posted April 29, 2009 12:18 PM            

Here's a tracking poll which explores the issue.

50% Say 'Rigged' Election Rules Explain High Reelection Rate for Congress
Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Why do virtually all members of Congress get reelected despite the public's disapproval of the legislative body they serve in? One answer frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 23% of voters really accept this answer. Those 23% believe members of Congress get reelected because they do a good job representing their constituents.

However, 50% believe the high reelection rates result from election rules that are “rigged to benefit members of Congress.” It is worth noting that the word “rigged” is a strong term included in this survey question. The fact that half the nation’s voters believe the election rules are "rigged" is a testament to the high levels of distrust in the country today.

Twenty-eight percent (28%) aren’t sure how to explain the extraordinarily high level of job security enjoyed by incumbent legislators.

Over the last century, turnover in Congress has been declining dramatically. At the time the Constitution was written, the Founders expected a 50% turnover in the House following each election. That standard existed for most of the nineteenth century. Turnover fell to single digits for the first time in 1968. Currently, other than freshman in their first reelection bid, it takes an exceptional circumstance to defeat an incumbent.

A variety of factors contribute to the high reelection rates including gerrymandering that effectively lets incumbents select their voters rather than having voters select their representatives.

Not surprisingly, America’s Political Class disagrees with the public perception on why those in Congress are virtually impossible to defeat. By a 60% to 18% margin, the political elites say legislators get reelected because they do a good job representing their constituents.

Other data from the survey challenges that perception. When making important decisions, 72% of voters believe that members of Congress listen to special interest lobbyists more than the voters they represent. Only 15% say that voters carry more sway.

By a 75% to 13% margin, voters think legislators listen to partisan leaders in Congress rather than the folks back home.

Forty-five percent (45%) believe used car salesman are more ethical than members of Congress while 28% hold the opposite view. Among the Political Class, members of Congress are seen as more ethical by a 52% to 10% margin. Among those with more populist or Mainstream views, 60% say used car salesman are more ethical.

Earlier surveys have shown that 67% trust their own judgment on the economy more than members of Congress. Also, by a two-to-one margin, Americans believe no matter how bad things are, Congress can make it worse.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) say that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. It is that fear that drives most business leaders to contribute to campaigns. It’s also why most say donors get more than their money’s worth back for their political “investments.”

The Political Class and Mainstream classifications are determined by the answers to three questions measuring general attitudes about government.

Most Americans trust the judgment of the public more than political leaders, view the federal government as a special interest group and believe that big business and big government work together against the interests of investors and consumers. Only seven percent (7%) share the opposite view and can be considered part of the Political Class.

posted April 29, 2009 12:34 PM              

i have no idea how these jokers get re-elected.

i say if t hey drug test medicaid and welfare recipients all members of congress and anyone who recieves a paycheck from the state or federal governemnt should be tested as well. that right there would get rid of half of them i would wager.

posted April 29, 2009 01:46 PM            

This bill should have been called "The Reelect Congressional Incumbents Bill". This piece of legislation forbids ads aimed at federal candidates for Congress within 30 days of a primary election or within 60 days of a general election. Grass roots organizations cannot say anything bad about these people in television ads...and supposedly radio advertising. Can't mention a candidate by name or show their picture tied to some offense they've committed...the kinds of ads which people pay attention to and this 30 day and 60 day window is exactly the time frame when most people are paying attention. Ads which detail voting records in Congress cannot even be run in that time frame.

It's a clear violation of the 1st Amendment rights of citizens and citizen groups to free speech. Bush signed the legislation and later said he signed it thinking it was unconstitutional and that the Supreme Court would strike the bill down. Wrong.

Of course, the political class were all for muzzling the rights of grass roots organizations..and/or private individuals to run campaign ads against them.

posted April 29, 2009 06:24 PM            

I don't think Bush is an idiot. I think he looked at the Bill and thought it an unconstitutional intrusion on 1st Amendment speech rights. I think he was right in that but wrong to not veto the Bill and send it back to Congress.

posted March 10, 2011 12:09 PM            

Look at how Al Franken "got" elected in Mini-sot-toe.

Then, there was all that Chinese government money on behalf of electing and reelecting Kommander Korruption...which is blatantly illegal under US election laws.