That is, actually, not at all surprising. Congress NEVER rates high.
Now, here’s the thing.
Not one person in the US votes for ‘Congress’. That’s because ‘Congress’ is a body. But unlike other entities, like ‘the Media’, or ‘the Military’, there IS a specific person that can be picked out. The ones that represent their state.
When you switch the question from what do they think of ‘Congress’ to.. what do they think about their individual representative, the numbers change pretty dramatically. (Not surprising. After all, they’re there because they won a vote, in their state.)
Congress is like any other heavily stereotyped group, and those who stereotype them. When you ask about the group, a bunch of grumbling about ‘do-nothing bunch of corrupt, lying politicians’.
Ask them about Joe Shmoe, Senator of THEIR state, then its ‘Yeah, but he’s different. He’s a good guy. Gets a lot of good things done for MY state.’
Of course, usually the others are corrupt so-and-so’s because they get things done for OTHER states.
Money spent on my state, or my issue? Good stewardship of resources, obviously used for something needed and beneficial.
Things spent for other states, or other issues? Nanny government, government waste, rampant corruption…

“Congress NEVER rates high”
Yes, but the point is that it’s never been this low. In the history of this question, this is the lowest it’s ever been.

Actually, this says very little. It only represents the uppermost limit. Most people could be simply ‘ok’ about any of the items on the list.
It just shows lack of large amounts of confidence. Not a lack of confidence, or distrust. And I will remind that this is about the body, not about their own congressperson.
As for the military, what bad press? (Since they are the top, I guess you mean them?
The WAR, yes. The Military, no. Support the troops is all over the place. As always.
You do know most people can distinguish between what they think about the war, and what they think about those serving in the military, right?

When our representatives aren’t up to the job, it’s time to get new ones–not to give up on the idea of government of, by and for the people. That’s just stupid, not to mention anti-democratic. If you think the private sector is better at everything than the government, I suggest you look at the wasteful and criminally incompetent work of the Halliburton subsidiary KBR in Iraq for starters. Their employees are paid many times over for doing (badly) the same jobs that are done better by our “government employees,” the dedicated people of the armed services, for far less. And that’s just one example among thousands.
Do you really want the likes of Enron and Exxon in charge of everything? Or is your bias against government all about your contempt for people unlike yourself in tough situations and your reluctance to share even a tiny percentage of your income to help them? And please don’t tell me your church and others like them are going to to handle unemployment compensation and disaster relief all by themselves.

Yes, it is. And its likely (based on the study YOU cited) lack of action in resolving the Iraq War (which you support), the economy, etc.
Not in ‘government’, itself. It isn’t that they think government is doing too much, its that it isn’t doing enough, or the right way.
Actually, the greatest drop (and this IS about a single person, not a body) was in the ‘presidency’. 26 percent in 4 years. That edges out banks, that edges out Congress, which was, as noted, never high anyway, because all them ‘other’ corrupt guys who don’t come from their state.

“‘Congress NEVER rates high’
Yes, but the point is that it’s never been this low. In the history of this question, this is the lowest it’s ever been.”
And the point is, Michelle, that a 6% approval rating or a 96% approval rating are equally meaningless because we do not vote, as Karen Brown rightly points out, for “Congress.” We vote for Senators and Representatives, 3 out of the 535. Aggregate their approval ratings in their states and districts, and you’ll find that’s pretty high. After all, most incumbents get reelected.

“Do you really want the likes of Enron and Exxon in charge of everything?”
Actually, yes I do. Well Exxon anyway. At least it would run efficiently, redundancy would be minimized, and Since Exxon is a publically traded company, they have to listen to the stockholders (if you have a 401k it is probably you). Since Exxon does listen to the stockholders, the real owners of the company, I have reasonable confidence that they will listen to those who own the US government, us.
Better question, do you want the efficiency of the post office, the and the dmv to run your health care and distribute oil?

“…it makes me very happy that the American public has such a low view of Congress.”
what very unamerican thinking. but it fits you and you wear it well. i can only assume that you are happy that bush ranks so low as well? that you cheer bush’s breaking the fisa law shows that you have great contempt for the rule of law and our entire system of government. you really should move to a country led by a dictator, because your favorite dictator bush is just about out of power.