For Democratic Congress, Voters' Singular Disapproval Has Many Seeds

One GOP tactic is to slap a "do-nothing" label on Democrats, who set high expectations for themselves. Of their "6 for '06" agenda of domestic priorities, Democrats have passed half -- an increase in the minimum wage, enactment of new homeland security recommendations and federal funding for stem cell research, which Bush vetoed.

Before the end of the week, Democrats are likely to make good on their promise to tighten rules on congressional ethics and lobbying. The House and Senate plan to pass a significant expansion of the 10-year-old federal health program to insure children of the working poor.

"From security at home, plus the economic pieces of health care, higher education and the minimum wage, we are hitting key domestic economic issues," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.).

But few poll respondents interviewed have noticed.

"I don't think they know what they're doing," said George Craig, 62, a lawyer and Republican from suburban Pittsburgh.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), an architect of the Democratic victories who heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, acknowledged the problem. The midterm elections of 2006 showed how upset voters were, but for now sentiments are in flux, he said. The real change in the electorate will come next year, as a presidential campaign accentuates the issues and solidifies voters' stands.

For now, he said, Democrats worried over Congress's approval rating must take heart that their party still holds double-digit leads over Republicans in the polls.

"Clearly, people are frustrated with the slow pace of change," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. In large part, the problem is Iraq, which has scrambled the political equation, he acknowledged.

Retiree Dale Vaughn, 73, of Minnestra, Minn., is not happy about the way Democrats are spending his tax money, but what really gets the Republican riled may be surprising.

"The first thing I would have liked them to do is impeach him," he said of the president. "They're not going to get anywhere trying to hold back funds or change his opinion with these silly all-night sessions. He's ignorant. He's not going to change."

Melanie Harrison, 38, a stay-at-home mother in Denton, N.C., has stuck with her Republican congressman, Howard Coble, but she advocates a stand against Bush's Iraq policy that even war skeptic Coble would never stomach.

"I don't know if anyone could get him to change his policy," Harrison said, "but Congress has control of the funds, and if they didn't have the money they would have to change course."

Lukacs, who voted Democrat in the last election, sees things differently.

"I would like to see them do other things, like health care, but I think they're all tied up in their underwear," she said. "For whatever reason, the Iraq thing has become our national focus, but there are a lot of needs in this country that they're not getting to."

Faced with such contradictory impulses, Democratic leaders can take solace in such voters as Tad Pfister, 72, a former Republican county chairman in Nogales, Ariz., who supported Democrat Gabrielle Giffords in her successful bid last year to replace retiring Republican Rep. Jim Kolbe. Pfister acknowledged his disappointment with the Democratic majority, especially over Iraq, which turned him against his former party in the first place. But he promised patience, and he's not going back to the GOP.

"There's no way they can do anything to get out of Iraq. They're trying hard, but they can't succeed," he said. "We're just going to have to wait until next election and see a Democrat in the White House."

Polling director Jon Cohen contributed to this report.