Michelle Bachman has missed 37% of House votes

[RecycleMichael]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/bachmann-misses-nearly-40-percent-votes-200208873.html

Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has skipped 37 percent of House votes since launching her presidential campaign, The Hill's Michael O'Brien reported Tuesday. By the newspaper's calculation, that's 50 missed votes out of 135 taken by the House since Bachmann officially announced her candidacy June 27 in Waterloo, Iowa. It's no surprise that the presidential campaign trail is cutting into Bachmann's day job--but that doesn't mean her critics won't hold it against her.
 
Bachmann for now is keeping her political options open, saying she is "suspending" her 2012 House re-election campaign while she vies for the GOP presidential nomination. But she hasn't closed the door on jumping back into her House race if her push toward higher office fails to pan out. Anyone challenging Bachmann for Congress in 2012 will likely use her missed votes to argue she hasn't sufficiently fulfilled her duties this term. And those on the 2012 trail attacking her congressional record (we're looking at you, Tim Pawlenty) can point out her shoddy attendance to undercut her current term in office.
 
On a side note, Bachmann missed vote percentage is greater than the missed-vote percentage held by two of her House colleagues who are also running for president: Ron Paul (Tex.) and Thaddeus McCotter (Mich.). The Hill reports that Paul missed 25 of 307 votes--8 percent--since May 13, and McCotter missed 13 of 135 votes--10 percent--since early July. Of course, Paul's and McCotter's campaign trajectories are nothing like Bachmann's quick rise to the top.
 

Yes. I posted another negative story about Michelle Bachman. I realize that makes our guido slightly bitter.

Please make her the republican nominee. I would almost consider changing my registration to (R) if I thought it would help.

[Gaspar]

Meh. . .She's not a candidate, she's a placeholder.

[Conan71]

Just reinforces what I've said all along that any candidate from the House or Senate should be required to resign their seat to run for any other elected post effective the date of their announcement.  There's no reason any of them should still collect a paycheck or have additional time added to pension calculations if they are not doing the job they were elected for.

[Gaspar]

Just reinforces what I've said all along that any candidate from the House or Senate should be required to resign their seat to run for any other elected post effective the date of their announcement.  There's no reason any of them should still collect a paycheck or have additional time added to pension calculations if they are not doing the job they were elected for.

I'd make them intelligible to run until their natural term (limit) expires.  When they swear an oath to carry out the duties of their office, it should be for the term that their constituents elected them for.

Congress should not be viewed as a stepping stone, lest someone get stepped on. 

[Hoss]

I'd make them intelligible to run until their natural term (limit) expires.  When they swear an oath to carry out the duties of their office, it should be for the term that their constituents elected them for.

Congress should not be viewed as a stepping stone, lest someone get stepped on. 

Haha, I see what you did there.

[TulsaMoon]

They ALL do it.. They all suck.

During the November 2 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, CNN congressional correspondent Jessica Yellin reported on the voting records of Democratic presidential candidates who are also current U.S. senators. Yellin stated that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has missed "nearly 80 percent [of Senate roll-call votes] since September" and that Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (DE), Chris Dodd (CT), and Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY) "don't have great voting records, either." She added that "the Obama campaign points out that if you consider the entire year of voting, it is not Obama who's missed the most, but Senator Biden, then Dodd, and Obama comes in third." However, Yellin left out the fact that Sen. John McCain (AZ) -- the only current Republican presidential candidate who is a sitting U.S. senator -- has missed more votes than any other senator since Congress convened in January, with the exception of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD), who spent months recuperating from a brain hemorrhage.According to washingtonpost.com's U.S. Congress Votes Database, Obama has missed 74 out of 93 roll-call votes (79.6%) since the end of the August congressional recess. McCain has missed 63 out of 93 roll-call votes (67.8%) since the end of the August congressional recess. But for the entire year, McCain has missed 79 more votes than Obama; since January, McCain has missed 212 out of 403 (52.6%) roll-call votes in the 110th Congress, while Obama has missed 133 out of 403 (33.0%) roll-call votes.

[swake]

I'd make them intelligible to run until their natural term (limit) expires.  When they swear an oath to carry out the duties of their office, it should be for the term that their constituents elected them for.

Congress should not be viewed as a stepping stone, lest someone get stepped on.  

$arah Palin? She's usually not intelligible, is it because she quit?

[JCnOwasso]

I think it is bad that Bachman has missed that many at a very delicate time.  But I completely agree that any sitting congressman who decides to run for office should excuse themselves from service.  Not only are they receiving campaign funds from X, but they are being paid by the tax payers to run for office.  I hate to say it, but I would rather see someone pull a Kathy Taylor.

But here is my deal, Bachman is a house member, which means she is voted in for 2 years.  She began her campaign a month or so ago and if she gets the nomination she will have spent approx 70% of her time in office campaigning... all while making her 155k per year.

[Breadburner]

I think it is bad that Bachman has missed that many at a very delicate time.  But I completely agree that any sitting congressman who decides to run for office should excuse themselves from service.  Not only are they receiving campaign funds from X, but they are being paid by the tax payers to run for office.  I hate to say it, but I would rather see someone pull a Kathy Taylor.

But here is my deal, Bachman is a house member, which means she is voted in for 2 years.  She began her campaign a month or so ago and if she gets the nomination she will have spent approx 70% of her time in office campaigning... all while making her 155k per year.

Well...No dim has ever done that.......The POTUS has really earned his salary...

[Townsend]

Well...No dim has ever done that.......The POTUS has really earned his salary...

Are you defending or attacking?

[JCnOwasso]

BB you are right, mine was very one sided.  I don't like when any member does it.  I don't think Obama was in office for very long when he ran for President.  I will say that with a Senate member, if they don't win you will get approx 4 years of service out of them.  But also you have the issue of a President who decides to run for re-election.  If they don't have someone running against them, you save about 6-12 months of wasted time.

Really I just have issues with House member since they are short termers anyway, Republican or Democrat (see, I can do it without a nifty changing of letters for a subtle jab at another party, can you?)

[Conan71]

BB you are right, mine was very one sided.  I don't like when any member does it.  I don't think Obama was in office for very long when he ran for President.  I will say that with a Senate member, if they don't win you will get approx 4 years of service out of them.  But also you have the issue of a President who decides to run for re-election.  If they don't have someone running against them, you save about 6-12 months of wasted time.

Really I just have issues with House member since they are short termers anyway, Republican or Democrat (see, I can do it without a nifty changing of letters for a subtle jab at another party, can you?)

Problem is, with 435 members in the house, one house member is really pretty insignificant in terms of voting on floor items.  However, if they hold key committee posts it becomes more of a problem if they are not serving their job.

With only 100 Senate members and five or six Senators all running (last election: Dodd, McCain, Clinton, Obama, Biden, Bayh, and Brownback) it becomes an issue, especially with the narrow margin of majority in the Senate.

It's got nothing to do with the length of service we get out of them, it's the quality of it which matters.  If they aren't doing the job they were elected for, they should not be paid for it.  Much like if I decided to run for a political office and intended to spend a lot of my present employers time doing so above and beyond my banked PTO days, I'll likely be fired or asked to resign so they can get someone else in to do my job duties.

[JCnOwasso]

Problem is, with 435 members in the house, one house member is really pretty insignificant in terms of voting on floor items.  However, if they hold key committee posts it becomes more of a problem if they are not serving their job.

With only 100 Senate members and five or six Senators all running (last election: Dodd, McCain, Clinton, Obama, Biden, Bayh, and Brownback) it becomes an issue, especially with the narrow margin of majority in the Senate.

It's got nothing to do with the length of service we get out of them, it's the quality of it which matters.  If they aren't doing the job they were elected for, they should not be paid for it.  Much like if I decided to run for a political office and intended to spend a lot of my present employers time doing so above and beyond my banked PTO days, I'll likely be fired or asked to resign so they can get someone else in to do my job duties.

Insignificant to the overall process, but not to their constituents.  I do agree though, regardless of the position they hold, if they want to campaign they should not be receiving a check from the tax payers for that time.  If their are 250 roll calls in a year and they are only present at 125 of them, they should only receive 50% of their yearly salary.  Unless they have the appropriate amount of leave stored up, or a note from a doctor. 

[AquaMan]

Insignificant to the overall process, but not to their constituents.  I do agree though, regardless of the position they hold, if they want to campaign they should not be receiving a check from the tax payers for that time.  If their are 250 roll calls in a year and they are only present at 125 of them, they should only receive 50% of their yearly salary.  Unless they have the appropriate amount of leave stored up, or a note from a doctor. 

You can't really use arbitrary numbers like that. Many votes are paired off for convenience or not voted on to provide some sense of defensability. IOW, by not voting on something they can take both sides of the argument; "I didn't vote for that bill" or "I helped write the bill".

They love their shell games.

[guido911]

I read today that teen suicides are Michelle Bachmann's fault.



As for her absence on votes, people may not like to hear this, but how many percentage of votes has Gabby Giffords missed since bravely surviving her assassination attempt? How about Sen. Tim Johnson after he suffered his stroke? Why haven't we didn't we have these two place sitter's seats filled while each heroically battled to recovery? Because...because...because..."'hey, she survived an assassination attempt!' and "Johnson was rehabilitating'" Point is, pig piling on every little thing Bachmann does can result in damned stupid and hypocritical nitpicking. And yes, I have pig piled on some dems such as Obama, but have given him and others their due when I thought he deserved it.

And how did Sarah Palin work her way into this thread?