Congratulations, Washington: Americans Are Now More Concerned About Your Dysfunction Than the Economy

House Republicans celebrate passing a spending bill that defunds the Obamacare and keeps the government running.
National Journal
Matt Vasilogambros
Oct. 9, 2013, 7:11 a.m.

Con­gress has had an ap­prov­al rat­ing hov­er­ing in the teens for sev­er­al years now. That’s not new. But as Wash­ing­ton stumbles in­to the second week of the shut­down, con­cern for a dys­func­tion­al gov­ern­ment has reached re­cord levels.

Since 2008, the eco­nomy and jobs have been the top pri­or­it­ies for the Amer­ic­an people — a stat­ist­ic com­monly cited by law­makers when they’re try­ing to push for le­gis­la­tion. But now, ac­cord­ing to a new Gal­lup Poll, gov­ern­ment dys­func­tion is the most im­port­ant prob­lem fa­cing the United States. At 33 per­cent, this is the highest per­cent­age since the poll was star­ted in 1939.

Oth­er pri­or­it­ies for Amer­ic­ans sit well be­low this mark, in­clud­ing the eco­nomy (19 per­cent), un­em­ploy­ment (12 per­cent), the de­fi­cit (12 per­cent), and health care (12 per­cent).

And this level of con­cern for the dys­func­tion in Wash­ing­ton is sub­stan­tially high­er than it was dur­ing the last gov­ern­ment shut­down in 1996. When Gal­lup polled Amer­ic­ans then, just 17 per­cent lis­ted Wash­ing­ton’s prob­lems as the top is­sue for them. The budget and de­fi­cit were still the top is­sue, at 28 per­cent.

But will this con­cern last?

Last month, Syr­ia cap­tured peak in­terest at 8 per­cent, but now has fallen back down to 1 per­cent as the threat of U.S. mil­it­ary ac­tion has faded. But this con­cern for the gov­ern­ment could last for sev­er­al months. In Septem­ber, 16 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans thought the dys­func­tion was the top is­sue. Now that num­ber doubled. Ad­di­tion­ally, ap­prov­al for Con­gress is just 1 per­cent­age point high­er than re­cord lows.

Amer­ic­ans have lost con­fid­ence in their polit­ic­al lead­ers. With the debt-ceil­ing dead­line just days away, and a pos­sible de­fault im­min­ent, the con­cern for Wash­ing­ton’s dys­func­tion could rise — along with deep­er con­cerns for the eco­nom­ic con­sequences of law­makers’ in­ac­tion.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
4 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
5 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×