Record-Breaking Obstruction: How It Screwed You

Today is a day that will live in legislative infamy. Conservatives in the U.S. Senate set a modern day record for obstruction, forcing the 62nd cloture vote to move beyond a filibuster -- breaking the record for a two-year congressional session with a full year to spare.

To mark the day, Campaign for America's Future released a new report on the conservative "Block and Blame" strategy, detailing the year's cavalcade of obstruction. The report reminds us of Sen. Trent Lott's all-too-candid words from April, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail ... and so far it's working for us."

It's certainly true, if not terribly insightful, that obstructionism can either work or fail.

When it works, it's because you obstructed things that voters didn't want in the first place -- like privatizing Social Security.

When it fails, it's because you obstructed things that voters want their government to do.

What have conservatives obstructed this year? Here's just a partial list:

-- Ending the disastrous occupation of Iraq.

-- Providing health insurance to millions more kids.

-- Empowering Medicare to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices.

-- Taking away handouts to Big Oil so we can invest in renewable energy.

-- Repealing the effective ban on embryonic stem cell research.

-- Investing more in health research.

-- Making it easier for workers to join unions.

-- Investing more in fighting poverty and training workers.

Is obstructing all of that popular legislation "working" for Republicans?

Here's the approval rating for congressional Republicans this month:

-- According to USA Today/Gallup: 26%.

-- According to ABC/W. Post: 32%

-- According to the Harris poll: 23%

Bravo, obstruction.

Yes, the rating for Democrats is not great either.

But it's higher than the Republicans in two of the three polls -- USA Today/Gallup says 30% and ABC/W. Post says 40%.

And considering that all of the above initiatives boast majority support from the public, clearly the frustration with Democrats is not what they're fighting for, but how hard they're fighting.

That doesn't translate into any additional support for the conservative obstructionists.

The only hope the obstructionists have is for the media to fail to inform the voters what is being obstructed.

And since we know we can't rely on the media to tell the full story, it's up to us to spread the word.

A slightly different version of this post was published earlier at the Campaign for America's Future blog.

Comments

[BobLablah]

This just in: The democratic congess votes $70 billion worth of unconditional support for the Iraq war. You're behind the times my man. Your leaders see the war as a winner now and they did a 180 so they could be on the winning side.

[sonofloud]

Thats what happens when you live in a republic instead of a democracy.

[stlrfan]

How didst they screw us,let me count the ways.Render unto Bush that which is Bush's.Et tu Reid Pelosi et al.

[SamEllison]

Lott don't care, he's leaving for the big money. It's a shame, Lott's record that is.

[Kansas Evans]

The Dems in Congress hold lots of press conferences. If they say something particularly unusual from the floor of the House or Senate, traditional media will pick it up.

Why don't Dems talk about the obstruction and talk about it and talk about it and talk about it. The reason it's working is that Reid constant backing down notwithstanding, the Dems aren't doing a good enough job of informing the public. Who cares what the conservative machine will say? It's not like they can make the Dems look worse for pointing out Republican obstruction.

[realitytrumpsbull]

Riiiight, but if you stop to consider that there
is probably only about a coat of paint in
difference between the two parties, and that
sometimes they just start a boxing match with
each other, well not a real boxing match, more
like a rapid exchange of harsh words at most,
but anyway, they take a given issue and play
political badminton with it and then they
pre-spend federal tax revenue anyway like it
was going out of style.

I think the reason I like the concept of
the Independents so much is that they'd be
a little closer on the mark in terms of
maintaining a balanced budget, pulling the
plug on the Iraq war, and probably permanently
abolishing some types of federal spending for
all time. That may sound harsh initially, but
it does not prevent the states from finding
ways to provide public services independently
of the federal tax system. Right now, our
politicos, our representatives, are busily
trying to find ways to piss away more of that
revenue around the world in places far and
distant for purposes not entirely clear, but
ostensibly For A Good Cause. I don't know,
I'm not convinced that it is, for some reason...