« | »

Dem-Controlled Senate ‘Laziest’ In 20 Years

From the Washington Examiner:

Report: Democrat-controlled Senate laziest in 20 years

Paul Bedard
Mon, 2012-04-16

For those who need proof that the Senate was a do-nothing chamber in 2011 beyond the constant partisan bickering and failure to pass a federal budget, there is now hard evidence that it was among the laziest in 20 years.

In her latest report, Secretary of the Senate Nancy Erickson revealed a slew of data that put the first session of the 112th Senate at the bottom of Senates since 1992 in legislative productivity, an especially damning finding considering that it wasn’t an election year when congressional action is usually lower.

For example, while the Democratically-controlled Senate was in session for 170 days, it spent an average of just 6.5 hours in session on those days, the second lowest since 1992. Only 2008 logged a lower average of 5.4 hours a day, and that’s when action was put off because several senators were running for president, among them Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain.

On the passage of public laws, arguably its most important job, the Senate notched just 90, the second lowest in 20 years, and it passed a total of 402 measures, also the second lowest. And as the president has been complaining about, the chamber confirmed a 20-year low of 19,815 judicial and other nominations.

We are not sure this is such bad news. The country already has more than enough laws and measures to last a thousand lifetimes.

The Secretary of the Senate’s office didn’t comment on the statistics, but it did provide a comparison to action in 2009, the first term of the 111th Senate, when many of President Obama’s initiatives were considered by the Democratically-controlled House and Senate. By comparison the number of Senate bills offered last year was down 30 percent, the number of amendments offered sank 55 percent, and the number of roll call votes dropped 40 percent.

Maybe some of these Democrats have learned their lesson. — Just kidding. It’s more likely that most of them are worried about being re-elected and are laying low. For now.

Still, this report might make it a little harder for Obama to run against a do-nothing Congress, since it is his own party that is doing most of the nothing. After all, the Republican controlled House has been a whirlwind of activity. But their (usually bi-partisan) bills just end up being ignored by the Democrat controlled Senate.

So, to be more accurate, this is not really a ‘do nothing Congress.’ It is a ‘do nothing Senate.’ Run by ‘do nothing Democrats.’

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, April 17th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

3 Responses to “Dem-Controlled Senate ‘Laziest’ In 20 Years”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    Well, I dunno. I woulda called them the most criminal, not laziest ….

  2. untrainable says:

    It’s a do nothing senate alright, but why is the number of laws passed an indicator of productivity? These days new laws are unnecessary. When the old laws are being arbitrarily ignored by the do less-than-nothing justice department (mostly based on race or political concerns), what difference does it make how many new laws there are?

    Keeping democrats in congress at bay should be the goal. Beating them back into their hiding places would be even better. The sooner these worthless pieces of marxist trash are driven back under their respective rocks… the better.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      I have said it for decades that people seem to relate success to legislative activity. Instead of that conservative (pronounced boring) old way of seeing what works and, when forced to, change that which doesn’t.

      There are so many people who strive to win the “look busy” award. But all that does is attempt to cover up their own uselessness. When a person goes into politics, you have to ask yourself, “Why are they in that line of work? Are they there because they are skilled negotiators and can really make a difference or…has Walmart stopped hiring? 99% of the time it’s the latter.

      Take any elected official and ask yourself, “Would I let them wash my car?” and if the answer is yes then move onto the next question, “Would I let them paint my house?”, with the final question being, “Would I let them baby-sit my kids?” and when I get to Reid, Frank, Dodd, Pelosi, etc, the answers all come back a resounding “NO!”.

      Thus, people enter politics for a myriad of reasons but usually, it’s because they don’t like work-a-day lives, don’t like being held accountable, and don’t like not being able to go to the next higher level and kissing butt to get promoted. But in politics, all things are possible and….above all else, you can make a huge show out of ‘doing your job’ by attending fundraisers, bridge dedications, Rotary Club meetings, being on TV, without every having to do any real work.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »