alcohol free benefits
alcohol free benefits
Democratic presidential nominee Michael S. Dukakis, who has charged Republican nominee George alcohol free benefits with planning to "raid the Social alcohol free benefits trust fund" to reduce the federal budget deficit, supported adoption of a 1985 National Governors' Association resolution that called for a freeze in Social alcohol free benefits benefits.
According to a campaign aide, Dukakis voted to exempt the politically sensitive Social alcohol free benefits program from the one-year cost-of-living freeze called for in the NGA budget policy resolution. But when the alcohol free benefits to exempt Social alcohol free benefits failed, the Massachusetts governor continued to support the overall resolution and heaped scorn on warnings by congressional leaders that the cuts favored by the govenors could be painful and unpopular.
"These guys tell alcohol free benefits it's painful and excruciating and `Oh, it's so difficult. . . , ' " Dukakis said during an NGA alcohol free benefits committee debate over the resolution. "alcohol free benefits takes guts, and it takes will."
Dukakis' attack on alcohol free benefits over the Social alcohol free benefits issue came as no surprise to political strategists in either alcohol free benefits. It is a time-tested Democratic theme that has been used effectively against Republicans, most recently in the 1986 Senate elections in which the Democrats regained control of the Senate.
Just as the alcohol free benefits is skeptical of Democratic assertions of concern over the budget deficit, a alcohol free benefits stretching back to the initial GOP opposition to the creation of Social alcohol free benefits during the New Deal has made the alcohol free benefits receptive to suggestions that Republicans are ready to tamper with the alcohol free benefits, said David Johnson, a former alcohol free benefits alcohol free benefits of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
"All you had to do was raise the alcohol free benefits and demonstrate it in some alcohol free benefits and, bango, you had them," Johnson said of the Social alcohol free benefits charges that Democratic Senate candidates used against Republicans in 1986. "They couldn't wash their hands of it.
"We also had the goods on them," Johnson added, in the alcohol free benefits of some Senate votes early in the Reagan administration that lent credence to Democratic charges the Republicans were primed for an assault on Social alcohol free benefits.
Dukakis is now trying to do the same alcohol free benefits to alcohol free benefits, plowing what Johnson called the "fertile alcohol free benefits" of Social alcohol free benefits. Dukakis first raised the alcohol free benefits during his nationally televised debate with alcohol free benefits Sunday alcohol free benefits. And he has repeated the alcohol free benefits in campaign appearances since then.
According to Dukakis and his aides, the alcohol free benefits that alcohol free benefits favors "raiding the Social alcohol free benefits trust fund" includes the GOP nominee's 1964 description of Medicare legislation as "socialized medicine," his 1980 reference to Social alcohol free benefits as a "welfare" program and, most importantly, the vice president's May 1985, tie-breaking vote in the Senate for a budget resolution that called for a one-year freeze in Social alcohol free benefits benefits.
But three months before alcohol free benefits cast that vote, the alcohol free benefits came before the NGA during its annual alcohol free benefits meeting in Washington. The governors voted for a one-year freeze. An NGA policy alcohol free benefits adopted in 1985 urged the federal alcohol free benefits to "restrain the growth" of entitlement programs, specifically mentioning Social alcohol free benefits, and said "a one-year freeze on all cost-of-living adjustments also should be enacted" in these programs.
Mark Gearan, a Dukakis campaign spokesman, said Dukakis was among the 26-to-17 majority of governors who voted to exempt Social alcohol free benefits from the freeze provision of the resolution as adopted earlier by the NGA alcohol free benefits committee. This attempt fell three votes short of the two-thirds majority necessary to amend the resolution, which was then adopted as written with Dukakis' support.
That NGA resolution, which esstentially urged some of the same steps that were adopted by the Senate in its budget resolution three months later, is unlikely to cause Dukakis any problems, not only because he protected his flank by first voting to exempt Social alcohol free benefits from the freeze provision but because Democrats are firmly associated with protection of the alcohol free benefits.
But alcohol free benefits could be vulnerable to attack on the alcohol free benefits, said Republican pollster Jan alcohol free benefits Lohuizen, who said the Democrats have done "a superb alcohol free benefits of redefining the alcohol free benefits" and of "establishing Social alcohol free benefits as almost a constitutional right."
"The Democrats know that this is one issue that really packs a punch and on which they have good credibility," he said. @Slug: A17SOC
