57% Would Like to Replace Entire Congress

[CG51]

If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.

Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress#) industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.

There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it's not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.

(Want a free daily e-mail update (http://visitor.constantcontact.com/email.jsp?m=1102135387545%252526p=oi%2525255D)? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter (http://twitter.com/RasmussenPoll) or Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Asbury-Park-NJ/Rasmussen-Reports/86959124863?ref=nf).

While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.

Republicans, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly support replacing everyone in the Congress. Their views have not changed. But Republican voters are disenchanted with their team as much as the Congress itself: 69% of GOP Voters say Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the party base (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2009/69_of_gop_voters_say_republicans_in_congress_out_of_touch_with_the_party_base).

Fifty-nine percent (59%) now believe that members of Congress are overpaid. That’s up 10 percentage points from last October. Just five percent (5%) think their Congress member is paid too little. Thirty percent (30%) think the pay is about right.

One reason for this attitude may be that most voters say they understand the health care legislation better than Congress (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/voters_say_they_know_health_care_bill_better_than_congress). Just 22% think the legislature has a good understanding of the issue. Three-out-of-four (74%) trust their own economic judgment more than Congress’ (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/june_2009/74_trust_their_own_economic_judgment_more_than_congress).

Just 14% give Congress good or excellent review for their overall performance, (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/scoreboards/by_the_numbers2/by_the_numbers) while only 16% believe it’s Very Likely that Congress will address the most important problems facing our nation. Seventy-five percent (75%) say members of Congress are more interested in their own careers than they are in helping people. On the brighter side, just 37% say most in Congress have extramarital affairs. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2009/37_say_most_in_congress_have_extramarital_affairs)

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans believe that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2009/americans_agree_congress_doesn_t_play_by_the_rules) Most believe that’s why politicians are able to solicit contributions from business leaders (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress#). Most, however, say it’s generally a good investment because political donors get more than their money’s worth (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2009/most_say_political_donors_get_more_than_their_money_s_worth). Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American adults say political donors get more than their money back in terms of favors from members of Congress.

Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets reelected every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses. One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”

Voters have a different perspective, and 50% say 'rigged' election rules explain high reelection rate for Congress (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2009/50_say_rigged_election_rules_explain_high_reelection_rate_for_congress).

When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representativeshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/2.gif (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress#) every election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.

In the 20th century, turnover began to decline. As power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer and fewer members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, congressional turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever, and it has remained very low ever since.

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (http://visitor.constantcontact.com/email.jsp?m=1102135387545%252526p=oi%2525255D) (it’s free) or follow us onTwitter (http://twitter.com/RasmussenPoll) or Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Asbury-Park-NJ/Rasmussen-Reports/86959124863?ref=nf). Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.



http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress

[XShipRider]

People wouldn't feel so compelled to "change" if it were not for the elitism expressed and conveyed by Congress. To fix the problem changing terms and having term limits would help:

- Senators - 5 year terms with no more than 3 terms for a lifetime
- Representatives - 3 year terms with no more than 5 terms for a lifetime

Changing the rules of the Senate and House would also help, such as:

- Term limits for standing committees with a change of leadership every 2 years.
- All recurrent spending falls under a 5-year spend plan
- All budgeting is zero-based vice automatic increases
- All pay raises must be specifically voted in (vice opt-out voting)
- Once House and Senate "retirees" return to normal life, they do not have any more access to their respective floors than any other citizen
- A 10-year moratorium on lobbying efforts, directly or indirectly, by ex-Congressional personnel

ALL spending is "on budget" vice the current model of "off budget" spending

But it's always better to whine about Congress then sit home on voting day, as so many choose to do.

[Kit]

Incumbents seem nice on paper. If they're doing a good job, keep them in.

Except the reality is most of the American people are too lazy to do research for the candidate they're voting for. So they're just vote for the status quo or their party, which is the wrong way of going about it.

That's why you have some crooked politicians in office, because those politicians have confidence that they can get away with just about anything.

I support the idea of term limits.

[budgie]

That;s true in most countries. People don;t question enough how hard a local candidate or incumbent will work for them, they just go with their preferred parfty. It's like everyone thinks bigger than they have to. One of the good things about the US system is the overlap with mid term elections, which helps tip the balance while a president is still sitting. Keeps everyone that little bit more honest.

[Kit]

Another overlooked aspect of American politics is local politics. Nobody knows who their local leaders are anymore. Even I'm guilty of not knowing.

[California Joe]

I'd like Jessica Biel to tongue my balls, doesn't mean it's feasable, practical or likely to happen.

[Elbs]

I'd like Jessica Biel to tongue my balls, doesn't mean it's feasable, practical or likely to happen.

I had to take a step back to appreciate the enormous quantity of win in this statement. Bravo.... bravo.

[boone]

I had to take a step back to appreciate the enormous quantity of win in this statement. Bravo.... bravo.
He said he'd like Jessica Biel to tongue his balls. Not you.

[California Joe]

Shut it boone, you ruin everything.

[Elbs]

Too late.

gibbersihshshs

[c62]

People wouldn't feel so compelled to "change" if it were not for the elitism expressed and conveyed by Congress. To fix the problem changing terms and having term limits would help:

- Senators - 5 year terms with no more than 3 terms for a lifetime
- Representatives - 3 year terms with no more than 5 terms for a lifetime

Changing the rules of the Senate and House would also help, such as:

- Term limits for standing committees with a change of leadership every 2 years.
- All recurrent spending falls under a 5-year spend plan
- All budgeting is zero-based vice automatic increases
- All pay raises must be specifically voted in (vice opt-out voting)
- Once House and Senate "retirees" return to normal life, they do not have any more access to their respective floors than any other citizen
- A 10-year moratorium on lobbying efforts, directly or indirectly, by ex-Congressional personnel

ALL spending is "on budget" vice the current model of "off budget" spending

But it's always better to whine about Congress then sit home on voting day, as so many choose to do.The only exception I have is the 5-year spend plan. That's a bit too far into the future, and the economy can swing one way or the other. So for planning purposes 2 or 3 years might be better. Other than that I liked it. Can I tongue your balls?

[Dominique]

I'd like them to take a poll of how many of the same people want their Representative or Senator replaced, as I tend to find, they always want the other guy's Congressman gone.

[Kaplanr]

First problem is that current house and senate terms are designed to offset presidential elections and bring a 1/3 of the senate up for election (or re-election) every 2 years.

Second problem is the rules of both houses would need to be substantially changed since seniority plays such a critical role. Maybe committee chairmanships need to be based on merit and qualifications, complete with resumes and interviews. Part of the problem also rests with the dependence / reliance on party loyalty to earn committee positions.

Go ahead and tell the WeeVees that Byrd is a parasite, same thing re: Murtha in Johnstown.

[Hollis]

I'd like them to take a poll of how many of the same people want their Representative or Senator replaced, as I tend to find, they always want the other guy's Congressman gone.


Exactly and they have term limits too, Congress is 2 years, Senate is 6 years and Presidential is 4 years.


Don't like them......... make this term their last.

[T3ngu]

I'd like Jessica Biel to tongue my balls, doesn't mean it's feasable, practical or likely to happen.


I had to take a step back to appreciate the enormous quantity of win in this statement. Bravo.... bravo.


He said he'd like Jessica Biel to tongue his balls. Not you.


Shut it boone, you ruin everything.

Quoted for the lulz

And with regard to the thread, you cant please all of the people all of the time. God i hope they vote out our state government in the next election. My state contains many stupid people.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Term Limits=FAIL

[ferguson]

I'm in favor of overall term limits.
With the insanity of the blind followers, look for an assault on the existing presidential term limits.

[Soldat_Américain]

It is the foreign element that commits our crimes. There is no native criminal class except Congress.
- More Maxims of Mark, Johnson, 1927 see quote

We have term limits in CA...legislature can't do anything so the state is run by referendum...and look where that got us.

[SpeedyHedgehog]

As much as I hate politicians of any kind, I will say this. If you were to replace the entire Congress you would see a clusterf*ck of epic proportions. A bunch of FNGs running around with their heads up their asses? You've got to have a few incumbents around who know how things work. Or maybe we deserve a clusterf*ck p-).

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I'm in favor of overall term limits.
With the insanity of the blind followers, look for an assault on the existing presidential term limits.

Term limits mean that most politicians will try to accomplish to much in too short a time. No limits mean politicians are more likely to negotiate and be less ideologically driven and it leads to much more stability both politically and economically.

Term limits also mean that many people who would make bloody good politicians would never even consider running. Why go through all the effort to be elected if this career is going to only last 5 years?

You want dedicated, hard working career minded professionals in politics, not part time douche bags from lobby groups.

[Flagg]

Term limits mean that most politicians will try to accomplish to much in too short a time. No limits mean politicians are more likely to negotiate and be less ideologically driven and it leads to much more stability both politically and economically.

Term limits also mean that many people who would make bloody good politicians would never even consider running. Why go through all the effort to be elected if this career is going to only last 5 years?

You want dedicated, hard working career minded professionals in politics, not part time douche bags from lobby groups.

"Career minded professionals in politics" is the 1st world equivalent of Ahmed The Impailer in Kablamistan, with an iron grip on his provincial patch....you need to pass through Ahmed's patch.....fork over the money.

Career civil servants is one thing......they are the true professionals in government service who can make sh!t happen when a nation or its citizens truly need it to happen.

Career politicians in a democracy where the incumbants own the high ground while serving special interests is NOT democracy....it's a malignant cancer in need of removal.

Politicians REPRESENT the people, civil servants SERVE the people.

SERVING the people is a noble path.

REPRESENTING the people is a PRIVILEDGE that is all too often confused with entitlements........and that priviledge should be short enough to avoid the inevitable corruption that follows power like a shadow to let the next wide-eyed rookie voice the choice of those he temporarily represents.

I am at the stage where I would FAR rather see random village idiots representing the people than the dangerous concentrations of power which exist today where personal fiefdoms are knowingly created at the expense of the entire country they supposedly "represent".

Kennedy is in the dirt now...... and with all due respect for his Army service........good F'n riddance.....46 years in the Senate?

46 years in the Senate.....think about that for just say 4.6 minutes.

In my opinion, irrespective of political party and personal policy objectives, Ted Kennedy is a poster boy for exactly what is WRONG with American politics.

It's a frickin' joke.......in my opinion Senator Kennedy differs little from "President" Mubarak or "President" Chavez in a few respects.

In fact Ted was in power longer than both combined....and in my opinion, is a VERY bad thing.

[TheSteve]

Term limits are great, but I think there are other, bigger problems with congress. In all these replies I didn't hear one thing about gerrymandering. 90% of congressional districts are uncompetitive, one or the other party practically are given a seat. And of course the last 10% are left to one or the other party.

Its a two party system, polls always show general disdain towards congress, but they still get elected. Vote third party.

[Hollis]

As many have said, the idiots still gets elected. WHY? We really do have term limits for Idiots if the electorate would do it's job. It is always easier to blame the other guy, It is we the voter that is collectively dropping the ball on this issue. Maybe A. Hamilton was right and J. Davis was wrong.

[Skutatos]

Maybe not term limits but parties should at least be forced into supporting alternatives to their incumbant congressmen and women so people who don't want to vote for the other party can still vote for someone else.

[vryhpyammoadded]

Clearing out the Hill’s entrenched incumbent power blocks would be a great thing and has been overdue by about eight years. It’s always fun to watch this process as the lobby goes bat sh*t nuts wheeling and dealing the new blood when the old corrupt connections vanish. The youngins are always so new at this under the table stuff that the journalists simply have a feeding frenzy over the smut and money with high seat turnover the norm leaving the corruption connections a bit unhinged with each fresh face passing through the door.

Talk about your starting out on the bottom to ride the new growth to riches. What a great day it will be for young aspiring politicos to nail hose empty seats and ride the corruption gravy train but only if they survive.

Remember Jerry Rubin “Never trust anyone over thirty”? Well, James Madison said something similar many times concerning career politicians as his unit of measure for corruption entrenchment. I agree and find it a great way to decide combined House and Senate service termination. If a politician has thirty+ years in both, out he goes! They simply gain far too much power to be trusted anymore and are a threat to all other state and district resources as they can often rip off inordinate amounts largesse for their interests over others. I like to label the 30+ year’s guys Whales or Imperials.

Folks, if the people succeed in unseating enough of these scumbags, we’ll see some mild economic growth in a few years when the boot of their parasitic interest and government wallet enslavement is thrown off kilter a decade or so. I only wish people went the next step and rip up the deep roots of party corruption entrenchment also. Reform the parties or beat them to death with a new one and this nation will be guaranteed good economic blessings for a hundred years or more.


TheSteve, Speaking of Gerrymandering, it is alive and well down here. I was just accosted by a mob of students at the post office all desperate for me to sign some petition for “Fair redistricting”. I declined saying I needed to investigate who they were and what it was they were really looking to do.

LOL, it turned out to be ACORN and the redistricting they were so insistent on doing here was in fact GERRYMANDERING to ensure the already lopsided pro Democrat representation! They currently outnumber the conservative base by 40% Greedy fvcks! They fear terribly the past ten years of explosive rural white, working/middle class conservative growth that the 2010 census is about to reveal and are desperate to lock in some neighboring small rural minority towns to maintain their death grip on policy.

[Universal_Soldier]

Make that 58%, I wasn't polled. :)

Mandatory term limits same as presidents will do the trick.

[Universal_Soldier]

Term limits mean that most politicians will try to accomplish to much in too short a time. No limits mean politicians are more likely to negotiate and be less ideologically driven and it leads to much more stability both politically and economically.

Term limits also mean that many people who would make bloody good politicians would never even consider running. Why go through all the effort to be elected if this career is going to only last 5 years?

You want dedicated, hard working career minded professionals in politics, not part time douche bags from lobby groups.

If Presidents are restricted to 2 terms, what makes congress so different? Those guys are in pockets of special interest. For example, Chris Dodd gets less than 2% of his donations from his constituents in Connecticut...and the rest you ask comes from where? You guessed it.

These fat cats exploits; low interests in congressional elections, Special interest money advantage and Name recognition over their opponents.

[Abolith]

I think that outlawing Lobbyists would go a long way towards correcting the current situation. If the special interests no longer have unfettered access to law makers and the influence that comes with that than they have no real reason to throw chunks of money at them.. With no big money available the politically corrupt would find their "perks" dried up and they would start to move on.

[CPLHUNTER]

Lets get rid of them all....requirements below:

1. Angry Mobs
2. Telephone poles
3. Rope

Let your imagination run wild

[notherhen40]

57% of people want to change members of congress and start all over...thats a lie in its self.

Here is the real deal....

99% of americans do not know what congress really is
99% of americans could give a care less who is in office
99% of americans are too busy blaming the other guy,and not blaming theirselfs when it comes to fixing whats wrong
99% of americans do not vote
99% of americans do not know how to vote
100% of elections go to the highest bidder, because corporate America knows that americans do not vote, or care to vote, or take an active interest in how government functions
1% of americans who do vote belong to major corporations, whose sole agendas is to control the government to get what they want.

GOD BLESS america! Ain't she great?

[CPLHUNTER]

I like your made up numbers. Your an idiot p-)

[commanding]

I say throw all the bums out of congress, every one of them, ...make them take an hourly pay job, either mowing lawns, or working in Walmart for five years as punishment for their malfeasance.
Make new members of congress wear dog shock collars, and their constituents get the hold the remote control that shocks the piss out of them.

[CPLHUNTER]

Hey shut up, you don't exist according to the last poster who said 99% or 100% of Americans either don't know or don't care what their government is up to.

Aside from that, I like your shock collar idea :)

[notherhen40]

I like your made up numbers. Your an idiot p-)

Why am I an idiot? Did I strike a nerve? The sad truth is, most americans do not vote. Democracy in america is a dirty word..during any election, below half to just a little over half do vote. And if you ask people today what they think of government, most would say it sucks and needs changed, but all most all of the people asked, deep down are complacent and would not do anything except gripe. Let alone get off the couch and march their fat arse down to the voting booth and vote. If you would go to a middle school class, and ask kids what the constitution is, some would say it is a set of guide lines as to which this country was founded. But others, could not tell the difference between toilet paper or the constitution its self. And the same goes for most adults, judging from what I have read on these forums.

Its really pathetic, when a country, as great as the united states once was turns its self into a country that is as oppressed as China. It is really pathetic when most people care about what car to buy next, rather than who is going to manage their city, or what laws were just passed during their last state legislative session. It is really pathetic when the media (and not a jury) can determine who is guilty and not guilty, before a trial is to even begin after a crime is committed.

So 57% of americans want electedofficials changed....well I say nimbers are like, 1%. The other 99% could really give a care less.

Ain't america great?