This Congress made history when Nancy Pelosi became the first female Speaker of the House. They also made history when Keith Ellison became the first Muslim elected to the House of Representatives. Not all of their firsts have been positive achievements, though. According to Minority Whip Roy Blunt’s statement, I’d call the 110th Congress an embarassment of historic proportions. Here’s the text of Rep. Blunt’s statement:

“Not since Jim Wright was the speaker of the House has Congress failed to send even one spending bill, not even the critically important veterans’ spending bill, to the president this late in the year. While a milestone in and of itself, it’s hardly an accomplishment to be proud of, especially since it didn’t have to be this way. The Senate has appointed conferees to every single spending measure it has passed. It’s anyone’s guess as to why the speaker hasn’t followed suit, but it seems more than apparent that politics might have something to do with it.

“It’s time for the majority to live up to the promise it made earlier this year and stop politicizing our troops. It can do that by finishing the veterans funding bill immediately, and then moving on to the other six that have secured the support of both chambers, but not the support, apparently, of Democratic leadership. All Republicans are asking is that Congress actually do its job. Is that too much to ask?”

NOTE: The House passed the veterans’ appropriations bill on June 15, 2007 by a margin of 409-2, with the Senate passing its own version and naming conferees on September 6th. Blunt joined Mr. Boehner and other Republican leaders in August in sending a letter to the speaker urging her to agree to a conference, appoint conferees, and reconcile a final bill. She has not yet complied.

This afternoon, I called into the Final Word while they talked about Jim Oberstar not helping getting the emergency appropriation bill passed and signed for rebuilding the I-35 Bridge. I said that we’d all heard the Democrats “6 for ‘06″ campaign slogan but little did we think that that’s all that they’d accomplish this year.

I’ve called them the “Congress That Wouldn’t Govern“. Rep. Blunt’s statement re-inforces that opinion. It’s long past time to get these spending bills finished. While I’ll readily admit that it isn’t common to get all thirteen bills done in time, it’s unheard of to see Congress not pass a single bill for the president to sign.

Mr. Blunt’s statement says that Ms. Pelosi hasn’t appointed conferees to reconcile the House and Senate version of the veterans’ appropriation bill. I suspect that they’re waiting on that so they can lard it up with special spending requests. That’s despicable on the Democrats’ behalf. They should be called on it. Democrats should especially be exposed when they say that they support the troops. If they supported the troops, they would’ve gotten this bill passed months ago.

Under Ms. Pelosi’s leadership, the House hasn’t gotten much of anything done. Based on a recent Field Poll, people have noticed:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s own party is turning on her, apparently because of a perception among California Democrats that she has not done enough to shake up the status quo in Washington, D.C., according to a Field Poll released Friday.

Congress overall is doing even worse with California voters, with an approval rating sagging to 30 percent or below for only the seventh time in the past 15 years, the poll of 1,201 registered voters found. Both Pelosi, the San Francisco Democrat who became speaker this year, and Congress as a whole have fallen short of voter expectations since taking over both houses, poll director Mark DiCamillo said.

“I think the reason for her decline and the low ratings Congress is getting is that voters here are not seeing any change,” DiCamillo said.

The chickens are coming home to roost on Ms. Pelosi. She was stuck in a Catch-22 situation. To win the majority, Democrats had to be seen as change agents so that’s the campaign strategy they adopted. Now that they’ve won the majority, they’re being exposed as a status quo congress when people are demanding real change.

Then-Speaker Hastert told me at a Bachmann fundraiser in July, 2006 that Democrats weren’t change agents considering 25-term John Dingell would be one chairman, 22-term incumbent Charlie Rangel chairing the House Ways and Means committee, among others. I told him that he was exactly right about that. Here’s additional proof that he’s right:

For Pelosi, it was the first time the poll showed more people disapproving than approving of her performance, 40 percent to 35 percent, with 25 percent having no opinion.

Other polls since 2003 have shown larger numbers of voters with no opinion, but Pelosi always won more approval than disapproval. As recently as March, California Democrats approved of Pelosi by a 5-to-1 ratio, DiCamillo said. Now it’s less than 2-to-1. Nonpartisan voters also have soured on her.

I’d be shocked if Ms. Pelosi wasn’t re-elected but the fact that her approval rating is this bad tells you that she’s probably having to think about becoming a one-term Speaker. The poll also found that people had a lower approval rating of Republicans than Democrats but that’s to be expected in California.

I won’t predict that Republicans will reclaim the majority in the House in 2008 but I’m not ruling it out, either. What I’m willing to predict is that this will be a strong anti-incumbent, anti-corruption year in the US House. That doesn’t bode well structurally for Democrats.

Technorati Tags: Roy Blunt, Nancy Pelosi, Appropriations, Jim Wright, Corruption, Polling, Election 2008

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

1. [...] Original post by Gary Gross and software by Elliott Back [...]

   Pingback by 110th Congress Makes History at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source. — October 29, 2007 @ 12:50 am

2. Phentemine….

   Discount phentemine. Phentemine….

   Trackback by Phentemine. — November 3, 2007 @ 11:04 pm

1. DO something? You mean, you actually want that face-lifted, botoxed smile to perform her job, too, besides just keeping her face from cracking when smashed upside her head with reality?

   Well, her performance IS reality.

   ‘Nuff said.

   Comment by Carlos — October 28, 2007 @ 5:14 am

2. Nancy Pelosi is the least qualified worst performing member of the house in the history of this country. Her communications and organizational skills are so abismal that it makes one wonder how she made it this far. Oh, I know, she got this far because she played the gender card. I hear this arguement about voting for Hillary. Hillary is qualified because she is a woman, she stood by Bill, she is a good mother to Chelsea…spare me. This qualifies Hillary only to be a wife and mother, not to be President. The same is true for Nancy. She is qualified to be a wife and mother, not leader of the House.

   Both Hillary and Nancy need to go home…leave important measures to qualified leaders…

   Comment by nocoen — October 28, 2007 @ 8:29 am

3. I think its foolish to predict at this point how 2008 will go for Congress. If the public is disatisfied enough with both parties, there could be a enough upsets to keep both parties worried. Thats the way the system is supposed to work. However, the public is a lot like a Rhinocerous; easily aroused, sometimes, but near sighted, and with no apparent memory betyond its last meal.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — October 28, 2007 @ 12:53 pm

4. I thought she just sleeps on the job. She gets nothing done

   Comment by adfg — October 29, 2007 @ 12:08 am

5. Noting except trying to torpedo American relationships with Isreal, and Turky.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — October 29, 2007 @ 8:28 am

6. Oh, the “Six for ‘06″ quip is very clever. I wish I’d thought of that! But, I guess getting six things done puts the 110th six ahead of the 109th.

   Funny how nothing is exactly what the Democratic base wants to give Bush for his latest misadventure. We’ll spend $600 billion in Iraq — where the schools are open! — while our children can’t get decent healthcare. Now there’s a priority! Nevermind that under Madame Speaker’s leadership, the House overwhelmingly passed a bill that would have materially bettered the lives of Americans, in the process handing a bunch of money to the healthcare industry (an industry that notably claims it lost $6.8 billion last year to un-insured and un-payed patients) and the pharmaceutical industry (well, I guess they’ve got their hands full dealing with the incredible profits Bush guaranteed them in the Medicare Part D reform).

   But Bush vetoed it just to show he could.

   Of course, there was the veto of the War supplemental that included a timeline for withdrawal. No, couldn’t possibly have that (unless you count the timeline that even lowly bloggers like myself see painted on the wall)!

   And there’s the refusal of the cabal to hand over documents, answer subpoenas, whatnot, in the ongoing investigations, inquiries and hearings surrounding any number of scandals wrought by the cabal’s criminal activites, ranging from Gonzo’s destruction of the DOJ, to FEMA’s meltdown in New Orleans, domestic spying, on and on.

   There’s a pattern, here. Maybe if the obstructionist republicans would do what’s right for the country and get out of the way, the Congress could get the peoples’ work done. The thing is, the only reason I can see that the republicans are fighting so hard is to appeal to their base, a base that is rapidly leaving the party. But saying the Congress isn’t governing or can’t seem to get anything done is like saying a watched kettle doesn’t boil.

   Sounds like not getting an appropriations bill finished is, in fact, actually doing something her constituents want, all of a sudden.

   Comment by Rocky — October 29, 2007 @ 9:12 pm

7. Excuse me, Rocky, I must have a different copy of the Constitution than you do, and obviously, by your anger and bitterness toward YOUR president, your copy that says it is the responsibility of the federal government to medically take care of whomever it pleases is the correct one.

   My God! Doesn’t anyone centerward and to the left understand “enumeration”?

   Depending upon the language in the constitutions of the several states, if they wish to insure everyone within their own borders, that’s their business, but quit extending the powers of the feds! You’re the one always whining that GW and his “cabal” has “grabbed” all the power. Why do you want to give him more? Talk about not being able to connect the dots.

   Comment by Carlos — October 29, 2007 @ 9:50 pm

8. Oooh, I was wondering where you were?
   Musta got your latest newsletter with this months talking points eh?

   Comment by T. A. Gray — October 30, 2007 @ 9:07 am

9. “Nevermind that under Madame Speaker’s leadership, the House overwhelmingly passed a bill that would have materially bettered the lives of Americans…”

   “…scandals wrought by the cabal’s criminal activites, ranging from Gonzo’s destruction of the DOJ…”

   Rocky, quit being a twit just for a second or two. First, the “overwhelming majority” spoken of was not even enough to bust a veto. Hardly seems like “an overwhelming majority” to me. Of course, if the House and Senate rules weren’t so screwed up to begin with, maybe the chambers could get back to discussion of issues instead of playing Machiavellian politics to gain advantage. Second, implying “Gonzo’s” activities were illegal shows very little understanding of the mechanations of the DOJ, or of presidential prerogative. GW (as opposed to his predecessor) waited long enough to figure out which of his cadre of lawyers were competent enough to stay on the team so the legal processes would be interrupted the least. Kinda says something about how, perhaps, GW’s predecessor politicized the DOJ, doesn’t it?

   Figure it out, man. You’re not stupid (at least you haven’t seemed that way - just misguided.)

   Comment by Carlos — October 30, 2007 @ 9:00 pm