The politics of voting against the bailout bill

Chris Cillizza:

...

... even a cursory glance at polling on the issue, shows why so many politicians voted against the bill.

In a recent USA Today/Gallup, just 22 percent of the sample said they wanted Congress to "pass a plan similar to what the Bush Administration has proposed" while 56 percent wanted Congress to pass something "different" (although what that different plan would be was not made clear) and 11 percent wanted Congress to take no action at all.

The results were slightly more mixed in a New York Times/CBS News poll where 42 percent said they approved of the government's financial rescue plan while 46 disapproved, and in the Post/ABC poll where 44 percent expressed approval for the plan and 42 percent disapproved.

The data suggest that this bill was far from a political winner for members of Congress set to face voters in 36 days.

And, for vulnerable Republicans who believe that the free-spending attitude of Congress and the Bush Administration was either partially or primarily responsible for their ouster from majorities in the House and the Senate in 2006, the idea of floating the federal government another $700 billion was simply unpalatable.

It's no coincidence then that of the 205 Members who voted in support of the bill today, there are only two -- Reps. Chris Shays (R-Conn.) and Jon Porter (R-Nev.) -- who find themselves in difficult reelection races this fall. The list of the 228 "nays" reads like a virtual target list for the two parties.

...

On top of the poor poll results for the bailout bill, it does not begin to point out where the passion was on this vote. When the phone calls to the congressional offices are running 1000 to 1 against a bill and there is no real organized effort to push those calls, the passion is pretty clear.

I think too the Democrats' attempt to shift responsibility for a mess they created onto the Republican has naturally given the Republicans little reason to take risks in voting for an unpopular package.