The Little Known Truth of Barack Obama's Legislative Record

As we all know, Barack Obama hasn't passed any major legislation. He's inexperienced, never done anything. We know this. We know it because John McCain and Sarah Palin, bless her accomplished heart, have said so. And so, we know.

Far be it from me not to take their word for it, but I decided to check things out. And shockingly... it doesn't turn out to be true! Really. So, take a guess on how much legislation Barack Obama has sponsored in the United States Senate, which has become law.

C'mon, take a guess.

Nope, sorry, take another guess.

Barack Obama has authored or co-sponsored 579 bills in Washington. And as a state senator, he sponsored 820 laws for Illinois.

That's 1,399 bills in all. Not bad for someone who apparently had done zero -- okay, according to his opponents.

I know, I know. Those 820 are just for a "state," so they don't really count. Except... well, wait, a "state" is what Sarah Palin is governor of. (At least for 21 months.) So if sponsoring pesky "state" laws doesn't count, what in the world does she have on her resume then? Other than ethics violations.

Besides, y'know, Illinois is an awfully big state. If someone passes a law there, it does affect the lives of 13 million people.

And, yipes, it turns out that there is a wide-ranging record of bipartisan laws he's co-sponsored, as well, working across the aisles with Republicans. Go figure, who knew?!

Okay, first, let's look at Barack Obama's 579 Senate bills. (To be fair, some of these are pending -- the U.S. Senate works slooowly...)

But here are just a few highlights of the ones that have passed.

With Russ Feingold, Sen. Obama helped put together and co-sponsor the Obama/Feingold 2007 Ethics Reform Law, which curbed lobbying abuses. The bill was perhaps the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.

Mr. Obama joined forces with Republican Richard Lugar as original co-sponsors of the landmark bill that improved the government's ability to detect and destroy Weapons of Mass Destruction, keeping them from terrorists.

Working across the aisle again, this time, with Republican Chuck Hagel, Barack Obama authored a provision to secure vulnerable nuclear weapons and nuclear material around the world, protecting them from terrorists.

Sen. Obama also wrote the legislation for his Homes for Heroes Act and SAVE Act, that increased services for homeless veterans.

Shockingly, it turns out that John McCain is also wrong about Barack Obama not being willing to go against his party. You see, Mr. Obama sponsored an amendment that required lobbyist disclosures. And as the NY Times wrote, "The disclosure idea's lead sponsor, Senator Barack Obama... 'has not been the most popular person in our caucus in the last couple of weeks,' said a Democratic aide involved in deliberations over the bill."

Gee. Apparently, it seems, Barack Obama has been willing to buck his own party. And work across the aisle. And sponsor and pass important legislation. And there are 574 other bills -- some large, some smaller, but all can be found on State Surge.

Meanwhile, his record as a senator in Illinois has an impressive 820 bills that impacted the lives of countless millions, as well. By the way, for fact buffs: the 13th District he represented was alone comprised of 653,457 people -- the same as the entire state of Alaska.

In Illinois, with its 13 million citizens, Barack Obama co-sponsored bipartisan campaign finance reforms, that the Chicago Tribune referred to as "the most sweeping good-government legislation in decades." He co-sponsored a bipartisan, groundbreaking ethics reform law and was the main sponsor of the Health Care Justice Act. As co-chairman of a bipartisan committee, Sen. Obama also helped pass predatory mortgage lending reforms, which prevent foreclosures. (Hmm, that was forward thinking. Ya think? But, tosh, it was just a "state" law...) He sponsored laws that raised tax credits for low-income workers, that improved childcare subsidies for the KidCare Program (bringing health care to 70,000 uncovered children), and that reformed welfare. And he co-sponsored the Equal Pay Act for women.

Further, Mr. Obama sponsored bipartisan legislation that made Illinois the first state to require videotaping of capital cases, and bipartisan laws for monitoring racial profiling.

This list goes endlessly on. A total of 820 laws in all. FactCheck.org has detailed descriptions.

None of this is to place a value judgment on the 579 federal laws Barack Obama authored or co-sponsored. Nor is it to equate state laws with federal. It's merely to address the false impression that the McCain campaign has tried to put forth that Sen. Obama has sponsored no important legislation in the U.S. Senate, never been able to work across the aisle and largely sat in the Illinois Senate voting "present."

Put whatever value you wish on the 1,399 laws Barack Obama has helped sponsor. Decide for yourself what is a "major" law. From ethics reform to safeguarding WMD to child health care to home foreclosure protection, and much more, you have a great many laws to choose from.

It's up to you to decide if passing laws in a state of 13 million people shows a person's interests, initiative and abilities and helps set precedents. In truth, Illinois state laws do not cover a nation - they just cover 4% of the nation's population.

In the end, there is only one simple point to this. Honesty. That anyone who suggests that Barack Obama has been ineffectual in his 12-year career as an elected representative, sponsoring no important legislation, unable to work across party lines, unwilling to go against his party, and avoiding taking stances by voting "present" -- then that person doesn't know what they are talking about. Or is lying.

UPDATED.

Comments

[ProudAmerican23]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery

[PBOHIO]

bannorhill,,,,,again, Just like the McCain campaign, you only tell PART of the story:

Here are some synonyms from Websters' Thesaurus:

Maverick: in opposition or revolt, contentious, aberrant, quarrelsome, radical, unusual, dissenter, malcontent, extremist.

Quite different from the definition you gave isn't it??

[PBOHIO]

Bannorhill,,,,,,,

Without the nail pounder, the architect wouldn't have a job at all!!!!!!

[babyboomerorig]

It's painfully obvious to the Republicans that Obama has something that will take them years to develop....the ability to bring factions together to SOLVE a problem, not just bully something through, ala, Tom DeLay.

Obama doesn't need to show any more than he already has. He's gotten economic gurus together for information gathering and yesterday, in FL, he had governors and a former Treasury Secretary together to discuss jobs in an open foremat with a real audience.

[Pdubya]

McBama voted for FISA and the Bailout.

Nuff said.

Nader, Baldwin, McKinney, Barr. American principles and platforms.

[arnray]

Since when are two things "nuff said"? There are literally thousands of isssues facing us. Using a couple of things you disagree with to discount an entire movement is simply childish in my opinion. If there were more progressives with that attitude then Mccain and Palin would certainly win. I don't agree with everything Obama has said and done. Hell, I don't even agree with everything I've said and done. But answer this question, "Is Obama a step in the right direction?" A major step at that.

[JayInDallas]

Maybe this didn't come out sooner because it would have been the bone of contention that distracted from the real issues. Nonetheless, for those of us who actually lived and worked in Illinois, much of this was already known. Barack Obama didn't spring full-grown onto the national stage without substance, unlike the GOP VP pick. By developing a dynamic ground game and honing its mobilization ability, Obama has demonstrated, and continues to do so, how much more effective building from the ground up can be as opposed to the GOP "trickle-down" economics tenet. The mere fact that he can generate 150 million dollars in Sept, in this economy says a great deal about this man.

All the GOP rhetoric aside, he is undeniably analytical, intelligent, poised and grounded. I look forward to his presidency.

[JohnFObama]

The reason his Illinois state senate time should be counted is because we're being asked to count Palin's time as governor, mayor and even council member. Remeber that Obama's Ilinois state senate district has more people in it than the entire state of Alaska.

[ThoughtAboutIt]

Palin got 600 votes to be elected mayor of Wasilla. She got only ~100k votes when elected Governor of Alaska. I wonder how those numbers compare to Obama's last two elections.

[Alonso Quijano]

Check this out, too: Obama has more years in elected public office now than Abraham Lincoln had when he became President.

So much for "inexperience"!!!

I haven't researched it, but it probably is also true for Teddy Roosevelt --

So, the two historically "best" Republican Presidents would have been branded "inexperienced" by the GOP today -- I guess they want an experienced team like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft . . . to
lead us.

[ThinkCreeps]

If there are any historians around in 2050 to describe the post-cold-war, Lugar-Obama will stand as one of the most significant actions that allowed that to be so.

It is an absolutely crucial effort. Its quiet, hope-to-god-never-needed sensibility testifies further to why brainless mavericks should not be elected.

[Martha601]

Why don't they report this? Oh, and good job everyone of ignoring the couple of idiots that responded to this article negatively. We're becoming more like Barack everyday. See, that's what a great leader does-inspire positive change, as opposed to...U know.

[robbie44]

Barack "Fonzerelli" Obama is cooler than an Alaskan fall.

[bannorhill]

Sponsoring or cosponsoring a bill. What is the difference? The sponsor initially comes up with the bill. As the bill progresses others contribute and cosponsor. Without support from the sponsor the bill will die.

Some bills may have one sponsor and 99 cosponsors. Does that mean the 99 cosponsors should get equal credit with the sponsor?

So what do we want in a President? President Reagan was a "sponsor". He forcefully pushed his agenda. He pushed his ideas through, they became law. That is a "sponsor". In contrast the President Bush is a "cosponsor". He has no clearly defined agenda and follows others ideas (bills). He waits for something to happen and then tries to help it get done. That is a "cosponsor".

Do we want a "sponsor" or a "cosponsor" President? We can not afford 4 more years of a "cosponsor" Bush.

Which is Obama? Looking at Wikipedia, GovTrack.us, and the Library of Congress web sites we get a clue.

Obama has sponsored over 300 bills since becoming a US Senator. Of these only TWO became law. One (109th S3757) names a Post Office. The other (110th S907) limits the sale of mercury. This is hardly the record of a leader who has a clearly defined agenda and is able to push it through to become law.

With that record he is not a leader "sponsor" like Reagan. He is a Follower "cosponsor" like Bush. As even Obama admits we can afford 4 more years of another Bush.

[MathIsTruth]

McCain is neither a sponsor nor a co-sponsor. He is a "maverick". Maverickism is the cornerstone of his political philosophy.

A maverick is simply someone who requires a leader to come up with a plan or an idea so that the maverick may disagree with it. In the absence of a leader, the maverick has nothing to disagree with.

So, by definition, a maverick cannot be a leader.

Obama, on the other hand is a leader. Until now, an African American has never had a smidgen of prayer of ever being elected president. Somehow, on his first try, Obama has managed to put together an incredibly well-organized, positive campaign. He hasn't had the need to jump from message to message. He's surrounded himself with highly talented people. He's brought a huge number of people into the electoral process. He's defeated a huge political power in the primaries. He's got all sorts of Republicans and conservative newspapers and pundits lining up behind him. I'm just scratching the surface.

You've got to have some major leadership skills to do all that. He's a leader with a vision. So don't worry, he'll get stuff done.

[bannorhill]

Webster defines a Maverick as "an independent individual who refuses to conform with his group".

Both parties have been leading us down the path of financial ruin. The last 4 years Republicans have been spend, spend, spend. Democrat plans are spend more, spend more, spend more!!!!!!!!!

We need a Maverick in charge who will not conform to either parties.

Mavericks have made very good Presidents. Teddy Roosevelt was a maverick who broke up the monopolies strangling the country. He was opposed by both parties but was able to reform government. 100 years later we need another maverick.

Obama is more of the same. He brings the attitude of "Government is here to save you." and "Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country can do for you.". Oh how far from "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."

Obama wants to insure 47,000,000 uninsured and tells us it costs $12,000 per policy. That is $564,000,000,000.00 more PER YEAR in government spending. That one item alone will increase the federal spending by 20%. Sure he claims he will fund it by more taxes but with the economy in a train wreck we don't need that either. And when has a government mandate ever come in under budget?

What we need now is a leader who does not conform to either party. That is a Maverick. The closest to that is John McCain.

[PrairieDog]

Saddam Huessein was a maverick. And?

[jacqmac]

Perhaps you need to re-read this article. I seem to have seen 'helped put together' (as in helped WRITE) at least TWICE. And-remember-'WE' are supposed to be looking at OBAMA'S TOTAL RECORD as a LEGISLATOR and, contrary to what you and Governor PALIN may think, STATE LEGISLATURES COUNT!! And SOME state legislatures count MORE THAN OTHERS SO FAR as the IMPACT on the GREATER NUMBER of CITIZENS is concerned.

[bannorhill]

"Helped put together". Do you want someone in charge of building the house who is an architect or someone who helps by pounding the nails? Obama has been pounding nails.

If his name was in the movie credits at the end you might sit for four or five minutes until you see him listed.

[zann]

A follower wouldn't decide to run for president, organize a great campaign, and be on the verge of success. I'd call opposing the Clinton dynasty bucking his party.

[bannorhill]

Using your logic George Bush would not be President now. I guess the last 8 years have been a dream and never happened.

[Territc]

This is a classical example of the blind leading the blind. Bannorhill blindly follwing McCain or is just a serious case of hate against Obama?

[VikingQuest]

"Obama joined forces with Republican Richard Lugar as original co-sponsors of the landmark bill that improved the government's ability to detect and destroy Weapons of Mass Destruction, keeping them from terrorists"

So did he have to work hard across the aisle on this one? Are there a lot of Senators that didn't like the idea of keeping nukes away from terrorists?

[jacqmac]

Well-sadly, YES!! You see, those Senators who didn't sign on to the bill had other things on their minds--like DEFENSE CONTRACTS, and BRIDGES TO NOWHERE and 'protecting Fetuses'.

[LiberTLover]

The more interesting question is that with all those senators and their umpeen years of experience, why did it take Obama coming along to put forward legislation to lock down loose nukes? You would have thought that would have been taken care of years before.

[VikingQuest]

"Sen. Obama helped put together and co-sponsor the Obama/Feingold 2007 Ethics Reform Law, which curbed lobbying abuses"

How is that working? Lobbyists gone yet?

[bannorhill]

Of course special interests are gone. The law passed.

Now that we have that law there is no way special interests lobbyists from Wall Street could possibly influence Congress to give them $700,000,000,000.00.

That just couldn't happen!!!!

[anelder]

I continue to be amazed at just how many people out there see the bailout, which is a misnomer, as something lobbies had anything to do with. Take a look around the globe and try to absord what is being said. No one is getting paid off. Businesses, which are vital to our economy, are being aided to stay in business. Savings of you and I, investiments of you and I, pension plans of you and I are being shored up for you and I. Banks are being assured solvency so that they will get back to the business of lending money to small businesses and individuals. Follow the money. The local grocery store has credit, that's how they buy their goods to sell to you. No credit no goods. Then layoffs or job losses. Do you get it?

so many are hung up on the false impression that somehow we are making sure the rich don't suffer. They won't. They won't get the golden parachutes but believe me they have tons of money as it is. It's you and I that will be in trouble. Never mind the 700 billion

and another thing your figure reflects 700 trillion dollars. The tab is 700 billion.

[LiberTLover]

That's why they are all working for the McCain campaign, so they can get that law struck down in a hurry.

[anelder]

Lobbying is protected by the constitution. It will never be outlawed. However rules can apply. One of those rules that Obama is favoring is that congressional workers, all levels, upon leaving office may not join a lobbying firm for five years. Now it's a lesser time frame.

[Ged2012]

Great post, Elis!

You've forgotten one very glaring fact, however:

Obama has sponsored more laws than the total number of days Palin has spent in Alaskan politics.

Bam!