Obama has worst State of the Union record since Ford, study shows

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Judging by his recent history, it doesn’t really matter what President Obama says in Tuesday’s State of the Union address — Congress is going to ignore him anyway.

Mr. Obama has the second-worst record of getting his State of the Union policy requests enacted into law of any president in the last five decades, according to an analysis by two scholars that puts him only above the unelected two-year presidency of Gerald Ford.

From 2009 through 2014, Mr. Obama issued 209 different calls for action from Congress in his speeches, but only saw lawmakers follow through on 64 of them — good for just 30 percent. That’s only slightly better than Mr. Ford’s 28 percent success rate, and is well below the likes of President Clinton, the previous Democratic president, who won 44 percent of his policies even though he faced a Congress more Republican than Mr. Obama has.

Indeed, Mr. Obama set a single-year record for futility in 2013, just after his re-election, getting Congress to pass just two of the 41 policies he asked them to consider. That’s the worst in the last 50 years, according to the data from Professors Donna R. Hoffman and Alison D. Howard, two political scientists who have tracked State of the Unions going back to President Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1965 speech.

In 1997, the year after his re-election, Mr. Clinton got Congress to pass 33 of his 57 proposals.

According to the two scholars, Mr. Obama’s best year came in 2010, when he had huge Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate, made 45 proposals, and won full or partial passage of 25 of them.

His rate began to steadily decline to 2013’s disastrous year of just two successful proposals, before rebounding last year, when Congress — still divided between Democrats controlling the Senate and the GOP controlling the House — passed five of his 29 proposals.
----

But hey, his golf score has improved 7 points!
 
what's the over under on the amount of times he uses the word "Need"?

we need to this, we need to do that, we need more, Oh my Gosh, we are so so needy!

What we need is a good 5 cent cigar (preferably Cuban).
 
"If Obama was for it we had to be against it."

But hey, we're fit to govern!

Clinton didn't have such problems, even with more of a Republican congress than Obama. And let's not forget that Obama had a fully supportive house and senate when he was elected.
 
Clinton didn't have such problems, even with more of a Republican congress than Obama. And let's not forget that Obama had a fully supportive house and senate when he was elected.
Clinton didn't have a Great Recession which brought America's stratification into such clear view--the 1% weren't scared then.
 
Clinton didn't have a Great Recession which brought America's stratification into such clear view--the 1% weren't scared then.

Ah yes, that old one. At least, you could have stated it in your usual fashion of "see, we had this thing called a recession."

That's always good for a chuckle. Yeah, it's all the recession's fault. It couldn't possibly be that Obama is far more hostile and confrontational, and a much worse negotiator (the great uniter indeed).

Nah, it's the recession. And Bush. And hobbits.
 
Ah yes, that old one. At least, you could have stated it in your usual fashion of "see, we had this thing called a recession."

That's always good for a chuckle. Yeah, it's all the recession's fault. It couldn't possibly be that Obama is far more hostile and confrontational, and a much worse negotiator (the great uniter indeed).

Nah, it's the recession. And Bush. And hobbits.
And, the feddunit.
 
democrats=mind numb robots, party loyalists, amateur defense lawyers always defending no matter how guilty the party is

at least the republicans are willing to admit their members are often bribed idiots
 
democrats=mind numb robots, party loyalists, amateur defense lawyers always defending no matter how guilty the party is

at least the republicans are willing to admit their members are often bribed idiots

Ricter has stated many times that his purpose here is to speak up for "his team".

Right or wrong doesn't matter.
 
Back
Top