112th Congress Passed Just 80 Bills, Lowest Number Since 1947
by Wynton HallAccording to a new study conducted by the Washington Times newspaper, the 2011 112th Congress was the “most futile” and least productive since records began being kept in 1947.
For many conservatives, fewer laws passing–and the spending that often comes with them– may seem like a reason to cheer. But as the Washington Times points out, because so many entitlement programs operate on autopilot spending increases, government spending grows automatically even when bills aren’t passed.
The new report appears to have sparked a new round of the Washington blame game:
Spokesmen for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, did not respond to questions about the lack of action.
McConnell spokesman Don Stewart did offer a brief statement that Democrats’ 2012 agenda appears to be the same as in 2011.
“Legislation that will be pushed will be what polls well, rather than what could feasibly be passed into law,” he said.
Speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Mr. Reid blamed Republicans in the House for pushing what he said were the wrong issues.
“We’ve spent months on things that used to happen just matter-of-factly,” he said. “I would hope that they understand that everything doesn’t have to be a fight. Legislation is the art of working together, building consensus, compromise.”
“Meet the Press” moderator David Gregory countered that the House is passing legislation, including a budget, which Senate Democrats haven’t accomplished for two years.
Mr. Reid again blamed Republicans, who he said were using the Senate’s minority-friendly rules to defy him.
“The Senate works on consensus. And we haven’t been able to get that because the Republicans, I repeat for the third time, I want to make sure everyone understands this: obstructionism on steroids,” he said.
Look for President Barack Obama to use the study to frame a Truman-esque “do nothing Congress” campaign strategy come November. Look for Republicans to frame Mr. Obama’s lack of legislative accomplishments as the results of a “do nothing President.”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
55 Comments
My only complaint is that it is 80 bills.
ZERO would have been better, and repealing 1,000 would have been the best.
We have way too many laws on the books as it is, each one limiting freedom and liberty.
I'd rather them "do nothing" than continue to flush us down the progressive toilet.
That sums it up nicely.
No new legislation that results in increased spending or expansion of the bureaucracy with concomitant regulations is a decent start, IMHO. The Republican candidates and Republican "leadership" need to inform the people that the real problem is the Senate where one member, Harry Reid, sits on legislation passed by the House and refuses to bring it to the floor for consideration and debate.
Harry Reid IS the problem in the Congress.
Should be 0.
Can anyone name the last legislation that was passed that improved matters? I can't.
The one bill that they should pass, but won't, is the balanced budget amendment. Considering they don't even bother with a budget anymore speaks volumes…
Quality over Quantity!!! I don't give a darn the number, it's what is being passed that matters. Too bad they are failing on both accounts…
"…because so many entitlement programs operate on autopilot spending increases, government spending grows automatically even when bills aren’t passed."
And that was done on a bipartisan basis in order to blunt the ability of the American people to vote into office a divided government in order to stop the foolish spending.
Once again it is demonstrated that the two parties act in concert – with We The People being on the other side, the receiving end, of their bipartisan actions.
It is so often said that We The People want the Republicans and Democrats to work together – while nothing could be further from the actual truth. We need the people we elect to stand their ground upon that, the First Principles, which they were elected. By their vary nature, Democrats and Republicans SHOULD be at odds, one is intended to defend the REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT while the other stands in direct and open OPPOSITION to the REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT and the constraints put upon government authority within it.
Folks, the only thing that "bipartisan" efforts produce is assaults upon our Individual Liberty.
That is about 80 too many in my book.
"because so many entitlement programs operate on autopilot spending increases, government spending grows automatically even when bills aren’t passed."
As we often say in my business, first, stop the bleeding.
A Congress that passes fewer laws is a good start.
But I would happily see more bills passed if they ended things like ObamaCare.
This is good news! No laws is good laws. In fact, it would be nice if they went back and did some repealin' (Perryspeak).
This what the 2010 election was intended to do…stop Obumbles in his tracks until he's given the boot.
Actually, the 17th Amendment is the primary problem in Congress. The assault upon the republic that it is constitutes a removal of a built in check and balance that affords foolishness like Obamacare to be passed only to see the majority of states challenge the law in court.
Were State government represented in the federal government as the Founders intended and the Framers crafted, each Senator would have been held accountable by the state legislatures and would never have passed that usurpatious legislation in the first place.
Repealing the 16th and 17th would go a long way toward resolving the troubles that Washington D.C. foists upon us. We admitted the 18th was a mistake and it is long past time we admit that the 16th and 17th were as well.
I agree completly, after the basic natural laws comes corruption thru law.
"In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous." Tacitus
if they don't pass a budget, then you do realize a balanced budget amendment does nothing, right?
Personally, I'm looking forward to having a conservative, American, constitution abiding president in the white house and continued gridlock in the senate and house. A plus would be a new speaker of the house … one with a pair of stones.
Come on boys and girls you can do it … no new laws, no new laws, no new laws!
– Judge Andrew Napolitano
The Government that governs least governs best.
Why would anyone argue for more Federal Government?
The MSM (even the Washington Times) once again aids the Democrats for doing nothing in the Senate, stalling or halting anything the Republican House passed over the last year, thus perpetuating and allowing the meme of a "do-nothing Republican Congress" to be reinforced in the minds of all who read these papers and studies. Nearly 1000 days without a budget – that is SHAMEFUL, Harry Reid. For that alone you should be removed from the Senate and brought up on charges of defying your oath to uphold the US Constitution!
The only thing that has been ALLOWED to happen in DC since the 2010 election (if not before) is whatever Obama SAYS is allowed: Reid only does what Obama says he wants. All other legislation, all other activity, is prevented by Reid, since the 2010 election flipped the House. The Democrat Senate is the do-nothing part of Congress, certainly NOT due to Republicans!! Don't people understand that "compromise" and "working together" means "give Obama what he wants or ELSE!"??
The truly heinous acts are what Obama has been and is doing: his end-runs around Congress; his extra-constitutional over-reach of appointing heads of bureaus and other "recess" appointments; unconstitutional power grabs; his czars and bureaucracies creating regulations upon regulations; placing moratoriums on anything that might ease the economy……..THAT's what is happening in the REALITY that is the Obama Regime.
Throw them all out, and get some leaders who are conservative, who support US Constitutional republican government, and who will free this country from the stranglehold of the federal government! Follow the limits of the Constitution, act in those areas outlined in the Constitution, and our nation will recover, will be restored, and will thrive!
That was true, but now the Democrats have started liking corporate welfare as well.
Good post…
The best government is that which governs least.
The sentiment expressed here goes back to my point that a Congress full of boulders and a cactus elected president would be better for the country because at least they wouldn't do as much damage as what the humans have done.
Democrats have always liked corporate welfare just as much as Republicans. It's just that now the Dems have been caught a few times, so we're starting to take notice.
This is the way the government is supposed to work. You have an anti-American, Marxist shoving an unconstitutional agenda down the throats of an un-wanting public, the people awake and they vote to take as much power from the dictator wannabe as humanly possible. This is how a republic is supposed to work, is it not?
What the progressives (leftists, liberals, whatever you want to call them) fail to realize, or just don't want to acknowledge, is that just a few laws, if enforced, can solve virtually all the problems of society, that are worth solving. Let's take illegal immigration, for example. By rigidly enforcing laws (if not yet on the books, they should be) that criminalize hiring illegals, renting/selling homes/apartments to illegals, and certainly, preventing illegals from getting government services, ALMOST NO ILLEGALS WOULD STAY HERE!
Another example: We already have all the laws necessary to punish people and businesses for discrimination, THERE IS NO NEED FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION and other programs to "overcome discrimination"!
And another: Have fines so high for environmental accidents that companies won't have environmental accidents!
You could go all day with this stuff.
Could someone from Nevada please explain how the dirtbag Reid keeps getting elected?
That isn't necessarily a bat thing; one can argue that Congress spends too much time passing too many bills, more often than not. In fact, this slowdown is just what the Republican House was elected to do. It's the quality of the bills that really worries me.
I agree wholeheartedly with your reply. I was just referring to the current criticism of the do-nothing 111th Congress. The counter to that criticism lies in pointing out what the hold up in Congress really is; Harry Reid. It is a bit of an Alinsky tactic to isolate and polarize; it also can be easily linked to Obama in the general election.Unfortunately, the general electorate is so ignorant that it will take awhile for them to understand the problems created by the 17th amendment. We are not going to educate them overnight.
I meant 112th Congress.
Zero would be good. Repealing some laws would be better.
Unfortunately, the CONTENT of those bills was still pretty loathsome.
80 bills 99.9% destructive to the Country and her People!
Make a new amendment that for every bill passed, at least one law/regulation must be rescinded? Or how about all laws must be passed again every 5 years?
I agree. Another saying is that all bleeding eventually stops. God help us if we can't stop the bleeding before it gets to that point. Bankrupting the country is the result..
Leave it to the dumbocrats. They are lazy, and do not work well with others. Heck, where are their budgets? That is right we have not had one for government in over three years! LAZY RATS! The last time the Senate passed a budget was April 29, 2009
10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-uni...
Certainly not the same way us New Yorkers keep reelecting Schumer and his clone. I think Harry is more of a ballot stuffer kind of guy.
80 bills sounds like it's still too many for my tastes.
Call me when they start sunsetting bills.
Then I'll take notice.
It's in the water
Must be
And by my count that is AT LEAST 79 too many!!! All we NEED is a Budget for the Government. After that they need to start looking at existing bills to repeal!!!
'Nuf said.
+100 if I could!!
How about just two or three really good new bills per session while also repealing a couple hundred old ones.
How much damage did they do with those 80 bills? Leave us alone. we don't need anymore stupid laws.
This article is great news. The majority of bills that are passed usually end up restricting your personal freedoms one way or another. The less of those that are passed, the better.
I worry more about regulations coming out of agency's that have the effect of law with little to no oversight of Congress.
How many budgets got passed?
Reid “We’ve spent months on things that used to happen just matter-of-factly,”
THAT IS THE PROBLEM YOU MONRON!
The economy is worse with only 80 bills! It would be better if we fired them all and have 0 bill this year!
If that's true then you must be just thrilled with this bunch. They certainly govern the least.
The legislation they passed in December kept my payroll taxes from going up. That improved my "matters".
The leadership of Boehner and McConnell is a joke…a real laughable joke!
They are, obviously, in bed with their Democratzi 'loon' counterparts and have played one too many golf games with them to be enemies to fight for 'real' America!
We need new leadership…America…in the House and Senate. I would suggest a member of Congress already in their ranks…one who has more cajones than all of them combined…Rep Bachmann.
I can guarantee you this…that woman…that Congresswoman…would not be playing golf with the enemy…she would be firing shots at them every, single chance she got…and she would win this war in Congress…you betcha!
GET OUT BOEHNER…GET OUT MCCONNELL…YOU ARE STINKING UP THE HOUSE!
They don't have to pass any laws since they abdicated legislation to federal agencies in the form of regulations. Congress needs to put on the big boy pants and recind regulation writing authority to every federal agency pending a full review of existing regs.
The payroll tax wouldn't be going up without the government voting on that to begin with.
Massive voter fraud. If the republicans could put up a fence around Las Vegas cemetarys and deny voting privleges to the minorities buried there.
"The more corrupt the State, the more Laws" -Tacitus-81 AD. A part-time congress, like in TEXAS, would be of more benifit to the American people.
That would be 80 bills too many. One would expect that after two hundred years America has enough law on the books. Past time to return to a part time congress.
I freakin' HATE consensus! To understand why Democrats like consensus, read this. The tactic is called the Delphi Technique, and they use it in faculty meetings in my district all the time.
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NewAge/Delphi_Te...
You must be logged in to post a comment.