 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gore Picks Lieberman . . . A Good Man Whose Policies Gore Has Attacked
- Social Security Reform
- Missle Defense
- School Choice
- Tort Reform
- Abortion
- Suing Gun Manufacturers
- Medicare
- Raising the Retirement Age for Medicare
- Pharmaceutical and Insurance Companies
- Affirmative Action
- Fundraising at the Buddist Temple
- Fundraising at the White House Coffees
- Reducing the Capital Gains Tax
- Big Oil
- Raising the Gas Tax
- Ethanol
SOCIAL
SECURITY REFORM
Gore Attacks Bush
Gore Attacks Bush. “Bush’s Social Security plan would be ‘bad for
American families and bad for our economy’ because retirement money would
be exposed to a fickle stock market.” (Ron
Fournier, "Gore says Bush Plans 'Bad for Families, Bad for Economy,'"
The Associated Press, May 8, 2000)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman On Social
Security. “A remarkable wave of innovative thinking is advancing the
concept of privatization. ... I think in the end that individual control
of part of the retirement-Social Security funds has to happen.” (The
Associated Press, August 7, 2000)
Lieberman And The DLC Oppose Gore’s Social Security Plan. Senator
Joseph Lieberman is President of the Democratic Leadership Council. The
DLC has stated that they think the Gore plan to put more bonds in the
Social Security trust fund is inadequate. “Simply extending the life of
their trust funds, . . . does not deal with the structural imbalance between
promised benefits and future payroll tax revenues. Nor does it restrain
the unsustainable growth of Social Security and Medicare costs, which
threatens to gobble up even more of the nation's resources and squeeze
out needed investments in other areas. Our elected leaders should not
miss the opportunity to use budget surpluses to ease the transition to
restructured Medicare and Social Security systems.” (Jeff
Lemieux, “Federal Budgeting in an Era of Surpluses,” The New Democrat
On-Line, The Democratic Leadership Council, September 1, 1999)
Lieberman’s DLC Has Advocated Letting Individuals Save For Their Retirement.
Senator Joseph Lieberman is President of the Democratic Leadership Council
that has advocated letting individuals save for their retirement. “At
a minimum, today’s workers should have the chance to control some portion
of their payroll taxes in investment accounts that would both increase
the "return" on payroll taxes and encourage supplemental private saving
for retirement.” (Talking
Points on Social Security Reform, The New Democrat On-Line, The Democratic
Leadership Council, November 1, 1998)
Lieberman’s DLC Has Supported Using Part Of The Social Security Tax
To Fund Private Retirement Savings Accounts. The DLC has supported
using part of the Social Security tax to fund private retirement savings
accounts. “Genuine Social Security reform means replacing its current
pay-as-you-go financing system with one that supplements public pensions
with private savings. We should start by no longer financing the budget
deficit with payroll tax revenues, and by saving more for ourselves. It
could work like this: The roughly one to two percentage points of the
payroll tax which the government does not need to finance current retirement
benefits – the so-called Social Security surplus – would be returned to
Americans for their personal saving.” (Robert
Shapiro, “A New Deal on Social Security”, Building the Bridge, The Progressive
Policy Institute, 1997, p.40)
MISSILE DEFENSE
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. Gore was a leader in the Senate against missile
defense and still maintains his opposition: “Just this past week, Governor
Bush used his brief meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov to issue
a warning that his intention would be to build and deploy a global "Star
Wars" system that he believes could defend the U.S. and all our allies
against any missile launch from any source. In the 1990's, most serious
analysts took a look at the implausibility of this endeavor, the fantastical
price that our taxpayers would be expected to pay, and the dangerously
destabilizing consequences of traveling down that path -- and rejected
this notion. Governor Bush wishes to return to it, and chose the worst
possible venue in which to launch - for lack of a better phrase -- his
risky foreign policy scheme. I won't even guess at the new math needed
to make his risky foreign policy scheme and his risky tax scheme add up.”
(Al Gore Remarks
as Prepared for the International Press Institute, April 30, 2000)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman On Missile Defense: “The basic point is that we've decided
that we want to protect our people from incoming missiles, and that's
the right decision and we ought to pursue it.” (Bennett
Roth, “Test Failure Could Determine Missile Defense System Future,” The
Houston Chronicle, July 10, 2000)
This Year Lieberman Supported Moving Forward With Development.
“President Clinton, notwithstanding this disappointment of the latest
failed test, ought to decide to at least keep the process moving forward,”
Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, Connecticut Democrat and a member of the Armed
Services Committee. (Audrey
Hudson, “Senate Approves $1.9 Billion For Missile Defense,” The Washington
Times, July 14, 2000)
Clinton/Gore Missile Defense Policies Push Lieberman to Side With Republicans.
Prior to the Clinton/Gore Administration taking office in 1993, Lieberman
sided with Republicans on missile defenses only twice in eleven votes.
But since 1993, the Clinton/Gore record has pushed Senator Lieberman to
consistently side with Republicans in favor of building national missile
defenses in 10 of 14 votes. (S.
1352, CQ Vote #158: Motion agreed to 53-44: R 4-40, D 49-4, August 2,
1989, Lieberman-Y; S. 2884, CQ Vote #226: Motion agreed to 54-43: R 37-6,
D 17-37, August 4, 1990, Lieberman-N; S. 1507, CQ Vote #168: Motion rejected
39-60: R 4-39; D 35-21, July 31, 1991, Lieberman-N; S. 1507, CQ Vote #169:
Rejected 43-6: R 2-41, D 41-15, July 31, 1991, Lieberman-Y; S. 1507, CQ
Vote #171 Motion agreed to 60-38: R 40-3; D 20-35, August 1, 1991, Lieberman-N;
S. 1507, CQ Vote #172: Motion agreed to 64-34: R 39-4, D 25-30, August
1, 1991, Lieberman-Y; S. 1507, CQ Vote #173: Rejected 46-52: R 5-38, D
41-14, August 1, 1991, Lieberman-Y; H.R. 2521, CQ Vote #207: Rejected
50-49: R 38-5, D 12-44, September 25, 1991, Lieberman-N; S. 3114, CQ Vote
#182: Rejected 43-49: R 34-5; D 9-44, August 7, 1992, Lieberman-N; S.
3114, CQ Vote #214. Rejected 48-50: R 5-38; D 43-12, September 17, 1992,
Lieberman-Y; S. 3114, CQ Vote #215. Agreed to 52-46: R 39-4; D 13-42,
September 17, 1992, Lieberman-N; S. 1298, CQ Vote #251. Agreed to 50-48:
R 6-36; D 44-12, September 9, 1993, Lieberman-N; H.R. 4650, CQ Vote #277.
Rejected 38-60: R 38-6; D 0-54, August 10, 1994, Lieberman-N; S. 1026,
CQ Vote #354. Agreed to 51-48: R 47-6; D 4-42, August 3, 1995, Lieberman-Y;
S. 1026, CQ Vote #355. Agreed 51-49: R 50-4; D 1-45, August 3, 1995, Lieberman-N
; S. 1026, CQ Vote #358. Agreed 69-26: R 51-1; D 18-25, August 3, 1995,
Lieberman-Y; S. 1087, CQ Vote #384. Rejected 45-54: R 5-49; D 40-5, August
10, 1995, Lieberman-N; S. 1087, CQ Vote #391. Agreed to 57-41: R 51-2;
D 6-39, August 10, 1995, Lieberman-Y; S. 1026, CQ Vote #398. Agreed 85-13:
R 52-1; D 33-12, September 6, 1995, Lieberman-Y; S. 1635, CQ Vote #157.
Rejected 53-46: R 52-0; D 1-46, June 4, 1996, Lieberman-N, S. 1745, CQ
Vote #160. Rejected 44-53: R 4-49; D 40-4, June 19, 1996, Lieberman-N;
S. 936, CQ Vote #171. Rejected 43-56: R 2-53; D 41-3, July 7, 1997, Lieberman-N;
S. 1878, CQ Vote #131. Rejected 59-41: R 55-0; D 4-41, May 13, 1998, Lieberman-Y;
S. 1878, CQ Vote #262. Rejected 59-41: R 55-0; D 4-41, September 9, 1998,
Lieberman-Y; S. 2549, CQ Vote #178. Agreed to 52-48: R 52-3; D 0-45, July
13, 2000, Lieberman-N)
SCHOOL CHOICE
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. “He’s proposed private school vouchers to drain
money away from public schools. I want to bring revolutionary improvements
to our public schools and reduce class size, recruit more teachers with
hiring bonuses and raise standards and give the resources to meet those
standards.” (Al
Gore, ABC’s “Good Morning America,” March 15, 2000) (emphasis added)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman Said The Public School System Is “Already In Ruins.”
“There are some who dismiss suggestions of school choice programs and
charter schools out of hand, direly predicting that these approaches will
‘ruin’ the public schools. The undeniable reality here is that this system
is already in ruins, and to blindly reject new models and refuse to try
new ideas is simply foolish. We can and must do better for these children,
and to cling stubbornly to the failures of the past will just not get
us there.” (Sen.
Joe Lieberman, Testimony before the Senate Government Affairs Oversight
of Government Management and the District of Columbia Public Education
in D.C.,” April 17, 1997)
Lieberman Was A Sponsor Of School Vouchers In The Senate. Lieberman
was an original co-sponsor of an amendment to the Neighborhood Schools
Improvement Act which would have authorized and appropriated $30 million
for six demonstration projects to provide low-income parents with money
to pay for enrolling their child at the public or private school of their
choice. Lieberman took to the floor of the Senate to announce his support
for the amendment and explain his reasons for supporting the measure.
The amendment was rejected by a vote of 36-57. All Democrats voted against
the measure except three: Joseph Lieberman, Bill Bradley and John Breaux.
Al Gore, then a Senator from Tennessee, voted against the amendment. (S.
2, CQ Vote # 5, Rejected 36-57: R 33-6, D 3-51, January 23, 1992)
Lieberman On School Vouchers. Lieberman said, “as I look at our
system of education around this country, it seems to me that it is hard
to disagree with the notion that it is failing a large number of our children,
and particularly those who are low income and minority.” (Speech
by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, January 23, 1992, Congressional Record,
p. S260)
Lieberman Called Vouchers A “Practical” Idea. Lieberman described
the legislation as “an idea that is practical and it is an idea that will
offer not only hope to a whole new group of low-income kids in our country,
but I think some lessons to the public schools and those of us who care
about them.” (Speech
by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, January 23, 1992, Congressional Record,
p. S260)
Joe Lieberman Has Voted For School Vouchers.
- S. 2. Elementary and
Secondary Education/School Choice. Hatch, R-Utah, amendment, with Lieberman
as an original cosponsor, to authorize $30 million for six demonstration
projects to provide low-income parents with money to pay for enrolling
their child at the public or private school of their choice, including
religious schools. (CQ
Vote #5: Rejected 36-57: R 33-6; D 3-51, January 23, 1992, Lieberman,
Bradley and Breaux voted Yes) (Lieberman was an original cosponsor of
the amendment with Sen. Smith, Sen. Coats, and Sen. Bradley)
- S. 1150. Goals 2000:
Educate America/Low-Income School Choice Demonstration Programs. Coats,
R-IN., amendment, with Lieberman as an original cosponsor, to authorize
$30 million for six low-income school choice demonstration programs.
The amendment would have allowed some poor children to attend private
schools at public expense. (CQ
Vote #25: Rejected 41-52: R 36-5; D 5-47, February 8, 1994, Lieberman,
Bradley, Nunn, Kerrey and Byrd voted Yes) (Lieberman was an original
cosponsor of the amendment with Sen. Hatch and Sen. Mack)
- S. 1513. Elementary
and Secondary Education Reauthorization/School Choice. Dole, R-KS.,
amendment, with Lieberman as an original cosponsor, to provide $30 million
each year for fiscal 1995-97 for a demonstration project at 20 violence-prone
schools to allow students at such institutions to obtain vouchers to
attend a public or private school of their choice. (CQ
Vote#238: Rejected 45-53: R 38-5; D 7-48, July 27, 1994, Lieberman,
Bradley, Bumpers, Nunn, Breaux, Johnston and Boren voted Yes) (Lieberman
was an original cosponsor of the amendment with Sen. Coats, Sen. Danforth,
Sen. Simpson and Sen. Thurmond)
- HR 2546. Fiscal 1996 D.C. Appropriations/Cloture. The conference report contains a proposal that would grant the D.C. City Council the option of using $5 million in federal money to provide low-income children with $3,000 each to attend a local public or private school. (CQ Vote #23: Rejected 53-43: R 49-2; D 4-41, March 5, 1996, Lieberman, Bradley, Breaux and Byrd vote Yes)
TORT
REFORM
Gore Sides With Trial Lawyers . . .
Fred Baron, President Of The Association Of Trial Lawyers Of America,
Said That Gore Has A “Perfect Voting Record” For Trial Lawyers. “‘Gore
has always--and I mean always--been a friend of trial lawyers,’ stressed
Baron, whose backing of Gore may sway other ATLA members. ‘If anyone has
had a perfect voting record, it would be him. Not one blemish.”’ (David
Byrd, “Why Trial Lawyers Have a Beef With Bush,” National Journal,
May 8, 1999)
Against Lieberman On Tort Reform
Lieberman Has Said The Civil Justice System Has Become A “Lottery.”
“As some of you may know, I have supported just about every tort reform
proposal that’s come along the track in my 11 years here because I think
this great system that we inherited from our English predecessors, which
was aimed at holding liable those who are negligent and create damage,
and making whole those who are injured, has gone way off track and become
a lottery in which literally a few people do very well but most of the
people injured don’t really get adequately compensated.” (Sen.
Joe Lieberman, press conference, “Compromise on Patients Bill of Rights,”
July 15, 1999) (emphasis added)
Lieberman Voted To Limit Damages In Liability Cases. In 1996, Senator
Lieberman voted to limit the damages that may be imposed in product liability
cases. (CQ Vote
# 161: Passed 61-37: R 46-7; D 15-30, May 10, 1995. President Clinton
vetoed the bill on May 2, 1996 but the House failed to override)
Speaking On The Bill, Lieberman Described The Situation In This Manner:
“I honestly believe that what is on the line here today in this vote
is not just the fate of this product liability bill, but it is a broader
question of whether this Congress is able to function on a bipartisan
basis and get something done to respond to a real problem as we have described
in our society.” (Sen.
Joe Lieberman, Congressional Record, March 20, 1996)
Lieberman Believed That The Bill Did Not Go Far Enough: “I make
no secret of the fact that I would have preferred a broader bill. Product
liability cases are only a part of the problems in our civil justice system.
I have real concerns that when we fix some of the problems there, some
lawyers will just target nonmanufacturing clients, like financial service
providers, municipalities, nonprofit organizations. I would have preferred
a bill that covered much more, but clearly that was not to be.” (Sen.
Joe Lieberman, Congressional Record, March 20, 1996)
Clinton/Gore Vetoed The Tort Reform Bill. The Clinton/Gore Administration
vehemently opposed the product liability bill and vetoed it despite overwhelming
approval by both the House and Senate. (Passed
H.R. 956, CQ Vote # 229: Passed 265-161: R 220-6; D 45-154; I 0-1, March
10, 1995 and CQ Vote # 161: Passed 61-37: R 46-7; D 15-30, May 10, 1995.
President Clinton vetoed the bill on May 2, 1996 but the House failed
to override)
Lieberman Also Supported The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.
Lieberman also supported the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
in 1995. This bill also received broad bipartisan support in the Congress,
only to be vetoed by the Clinton/Gore Administration.
(H.R. 1058, CQ Vote # 216: Passed 325-99: R 226-0; D 99-98; I 0-1, March
8, 1995 and CQ Vote # 295: Passed 69-30: R 49-4; D 20-26, June 28, 1995)
This time, however,
the Congress overrode the veto, a first for the Clinton/Gore Administration.
(CQ Vote # 870:
Passed 319-100: R 230-0; D 89-99; I 0-1, December 20, 1995 and CQ Vote
# 612: Passed 68-30: R 48-4; D 20-26, December 22, 1995)
ABORTION
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. “And I want to protect a woman’s right to choose.
Governor Bush, along with Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, want to overturn
Roe v. Wade and take away a woman’s right to choose.” (Al
Gore, ABC’s “Good Morning America,” March 15, 2000) (emphasis added)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman Personally Opposes Abortion. Lieberman tries to please
both sides of the abortion debate, but his personal opposition to abortion
gives way to an extreme pro-choice voting record. However, Lieberman says
he believes that “life begins at conception” and that society has a “right”
to “protect potential human life.” (Senator
Joseph Lieberman, Letter to Constituent, August 16, 1989)
Lieberman Has Supported For Parental Notification. Lieberman has
voiced support for parental notification and a requirement that the viability
of the fetus must be tested before an abortion is performed. Lieberman
wrote to a constituent in 1989 detailing his position: “I do not believe
the right to abortion is unlimited. That too, I suspect, reflects the
values of a majority in our society. I therefore support, for example,
the requirement of determining the viability of a fetus before an abortion
is performed. I also support a requirement that parents of a minor be
notified before an abortion is performed.” (Senator
Joseph Lieberman, Letter to Constituent, August 16, 1989)
SUING GUN MANUFACTURERS
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. "Gov. Bush has signed a law to allow more concealed
weapons on our streets . . . He fought for new special protections for
gun manufacturers to shield them from lawsuits." (Ron
Hutcheson, “Bush calls for national testing; He differs from party on
education issue,” The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, October 6, 1999)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman Opposed Suing Gun Manufacturers. Unlike Gore, Lieberman
voted in 1992 to support a measure that prohibited the District of Columbia
from holding gun manufacturers and distributors legally responsible when
someone criminally misused a gun. (CQ
Vote #152, S. 3026: Ruling of chair Rejected 32-50: R 2-33; D 30-17, July
27, 1992)
MEDICARE
Gore’s Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. “Al Gore today detailed his plans to strengthen
Medicare and noted that George W. Bush does not commit one dime of the
surplus to help strengthen the system, which serves the health care needs
of nearly 40 million Americans.” (www.algore2000.com,
“Gore Will Use Prosperity To Strengthen Medicare: Bush Does Not Invest
One Dime, But Supports Controversial Proposals That Could Raise Medicare
Premiums And Eligibility Age, July 6, 2000)
In 1999, Clinton/Gore Rejected The Hard Work Of The Bipartisan Commission.
Beginning in 1998, the Commission worked for more than a year and arrived
at a bipartisan proposal that was broadly hailed as a solid reform effort
to make the Medicare program solvent into the 21st century. (National
Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, “Transcript of Commission
Meeting, rs9.loc.gov/medicare /members, March 16, 1998; National Bipartisan
Commission on the Future of Medicare, “Commission Proceedings,” rs9.loc.gov/medicare
, May 6, 2000)
11 votes were needed to approve the Commission’s Recommendations. 10 of
the 17 Commissioners voted yes, including Democratic Senators John Breaux
and Bob Kerrey. However, to the dismay of many Democrats and Republicans,
all four of the Clinton/Gore appointees voted against reform and the motion
failed by one vote. (National
Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, “Transcript of Commission
Meeting,” rs9.loc.gov/medicare , March 16, 1999) Before
the vote even took place, President Clinton announced that the Commission
had failed and that his own advisors would draft a plan to “save” the
Medicare program.
For Lieberman’s Position
In Response To The Clinton/Gore Administration’s Failure To Accept
The Proposal That Was Put Forth By The Bipartisan Commission On The Future
Of Medicare Which Was Led By Senator John Breaux (D-LA), Senator Joseph
Lieberman (D-CT) Remarked:
"The experience Breaux had on Medicare reform was certainly troubling.
He was certainly true to the New Democratic ideals . . . I am troubled
by the way the wind is blowing . . .” (Bill
Walsh, “Demos’ Centrist Move Set Back; Liberals May Have Killed Breaux
Plan, Times-Picayune, March 21, 1999)
Lieberman Heads Up The DLC Which Supported The Bipartisan Medicare
Reform Clinton/Gore Killed. Senator Lieberman serves as Chairman of
the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) (March 1995-present). The National
Bipartisan Commission On The Future of Medicare proposal that was put
forward by Sen. John Breaux (D-LA) was a Medicare fix supported by the
DLC/Progressive Policy Institute. This is the same Bipartisan Medicare
reform that the Clinton/Gore Administration blocked. While Lieberman was
not a member of the Commission, a Lieberman spokesman said that the Senator
supported the package. (Jake
Thompson, “Kerrey Considered Pillar of Centrist New Democrats,” Omaha
World-Herald, March 22, 1999)
RAISING THE RETIREMENT AGE FOR
MEDICARE
Gore’s Position . . .
Gore Attacked Bradley For Voting In Support Of An Effort To Raise The
Retirement Age For Medicare. In a January 8, 2000 debate with Bill
Bradley, Al Gore attacked Bradley’s vote for a sense of the Senate resolution
on Medicare: “Bradley voted in support of an amendment that would express
the sense of the Senate that the age for Medicare benefits should be increased
to correspond to Social Security benefits. The sense of the Senate states
that the eligibility age for Social Security retirement should be gradually
adjusts to 70 years by the year 2030 in 2-month increments.” (www.algore2000.com,
“Gore2000 Reality Check: Medicare,” January 8, 2000)
During The December 19, 1999 Democratic Presidential Primary Debate,
While Remarking on Bradley’s Senate Vote, Al Gore Stated That He Strongly
Opposes Raising The Retirement Age.
VICE PRES. GORE: Tim, I strongly oppose raising the retirement
age.
TIM RUSSERT: Ever?
VICE PRES. GORE: Let me tell you
TIM RUSSERT: Ever?
VICE PRES. GORE: Well, in the foreseeable future, ever? I’ll say
ever, sure. And let me tell you why. You know, your logic is that since
life spans are increasing, the retirement age should also increase. But
what that misses is that steelworker in Buffalo that you sometimes refer
to, who has a hard, physical labor job, and the wear and tear on that
person’s skeleton and muscles is just the same as when average life spans
were shorter. And, you know, Senator Bradley voted in the Senate to consider
a measure that would raise the retirement age for both Social Security
and Medicare to 70. I’m glad that he’s backed off that now because I think
the American people are correct in opposing it. (Transcript,
Meet the Press, Vice President Al Gore and Former Sen. Bill Bradley, December
19, 1999)(emphasis added)
Conflicts With Lieberman On Raising The Retirement Age For Medicare
Lieberman Voted In Support Of The Same Amendment. In 1996, Lieberman
voted in support of an amendment that expressed that the age for Medicare
benefits should be increased to correspond to Social Security benefits.
The sense of the Senate states that the eligibility age for Social Security
retirement should be gradually adjusted to 70 years by the year 2030 in
2-month increments. (CQ
Vote# 149, Motion Agrees: R 32-20; D 31-16, May 23, 1996)
PHARMACEUTICAL AND INSURANCE
COMPANIES
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. “It is not all that complicated,” Mr. Gore said
at a news conference. “Governor Bush is with the big pharmaceutical companies.”
(Alison Mitchell,
“The 2000 Campaign: The Vice President; Gore Links Drug Industry and G.O.P.
to High Costs,” The New York Times, July 4, 2000)
Gore Attacks Bush. “[o]ur opponents in this election may have a
lot of powerful special interests on their side. They do. They may have
the big insurance companies and HMOs, the drug companies and the oil companies….”
(Al Gore, Speech
to the AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Convention, July 21, 2000) (emphasis
added)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman Has Accepted Over $330,000 From Insurance And Pharmaceutical
PACs. A detailed review of recent campaign finance reports shows that
Lieberman has taken over $330,000 from the insurance and the pharmaceutical
industries alone. Lieberman has long been cozy with the insurance industry
due to several insurance conglomerates being headquartered in Connecticut.
(Gregg Easterbrook,
“Not Your Average Joe,” The New Republic, November 2, 1998)
Lieberman has raised $217,319 from insurance industry PACs. In his last
two elections, Lieberman has taken $112,850 from pharmaceutical PACs.
(http://www.tray.com/)
Lieberman Has Raised $217,319 From Insurance Industry PACs. Lieberman
has long been cozy with the insurance industry due to several insurance
conglomerates being headquartered in Connecticut. (Gregg
Easterbrook, “Not Your Average Joe,” The New Republic, November
2, 1998) Lieberman
has raised $217,319 from insurance industry PACs.
In His Last Two Elections, Lieberman Has Taken $112,850 From Pharmaceutical
PACs: Al Gore has blamed the pharmaceutical industry for soaring prescription
drug costs. Gore said the cause of high prices was “drug company price-gouging.”
(Mike Glover, “Gore
Gets Tough on Big Drug Cos.,” The Associated Press, July 3, 2000)
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Defends Status Quo. “[T]he true test is standing up to those
who say they want to eliminate affirmative action.” (Al
Gore, Remarks at the NAACP Convention, Baltimore, MD, July 12, 2000) (emphasis
added)
For Lieberman’s Position
Lieberman On Affirmative Action. Joe Lieberman thinks that policies
based on “group preferences” are “patently unfair.” (John
F. Harris and Dan Balz, “Affirmative Action Divides Democrats,” The
Washington Post, March 10, 1995)
Lieberman On Group Preferences. “You can’t defend policies that
are based on group preferences as opposed to individual opportunities,
which is what America has always been about.” (Peter
A. Brown, “Group Preferences Opposed By Democrat Leadership Council Head
Adds Voice,” The San Francisco Examiner, March 10, 1995)
Lieberman On Affirmative Action. Lieberman said he agreed with
Californians who wanted to change the state Constitution to prohibit racial
preferences. “Looking at the civil rights initiative in California, I
can’t see how I could be opposed to it,” he said. “It basically is a statement
of American values. It takes the language and the values underlying the
civil rights acts Congress has passed and says not only should we not
discriminate against somebody, we shouldn’t discriminate in favor of somebody
based on the group they represent.”
(Peter A. Brown, “Group Preferences Opposed By Democrat Leadership Council
Head Adds Voice,” The San Francisco Examiner, March 10, 1995) (emphasis
added)
Lieberman On Group Preferences And Quotas. “[T]his business of
deciding by group, in a sense, is the flip side of the argument that has
flared up here in the last year about genetics, if you will, and the argument
that some make that some groups are genetically less able than others.
That’s an un-American argument. And it’s an un-American argument because
it’s based on averages, not on individuals. And that’s the same when we
come to group preferences and quotas. America’s about individuals, not
averages or groups.” (Todd
Gitlin, “Affirmative Action Isn’t The Real Problem,” The San Francisco
Examiner, April 4, 1995) (emphasis added)
FUNDRAISING AT THE BUDDHIST
TEMPLE
Gore’s Position . . .
TIM RUSSERT: Do you believe now it is a fund-raiser?
VICE PRES. GORE: This is beating a dead horse here.
TIM RUSSERT: No, no, it's an open investigation.
VICE PRES. GORE: Well...
TIM RUSSERT: When the director of the FBI and three Justice officials
say it should be looked into, that's why I'm asking.
VICE PRES. GORE: OK. That's fine.
TIM RUSSERT: You deserve a chance to talk about it. Do you believe
to this day it was a fund-raiser?
VICE PRES. GORE: I believe it was not. I believe it was not.
TIM RUSSERT: To this day?
VICE PRES. GORE: Yes. There was no request for funds. No money
changed hands.
TIM RUSSERT: But they did raise money and people went to jail for
it.
VICE PRES. GORE: After the fact, people went back and solicited
those who were present. I did--there was no money that changed hands there.
(Al Gore, NBC’s
“Meet The Press,” July 16, 2000) (emphasis added)
Conflicts With Lieberman On The Buddhist Temple Fundraiser
Lieberman Criticized The Buddhist Temple Fundraiser. “Based on
the excuses the Committee heard in testimony to justify much of the outrageous
behavior described above, we can probably expect even more surreal images
than money being raised from a Buddhist temple, even more hustlers trying
to put their change into the subway turnstile at the White House gate,
and even more alienation and apathy from the people we are elected to
serve.” (Sen. Lieberman,
Additional Views, Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Campaign Finance
Investigation Report, March 5, 1997)
FUNDRAISING AT THE WHITE HOUSE
COFFEES
Gore’s Position . . .
AL GORE: “Well again, that’s pretty selective. The question was about
white house coffees and I did misinterpret that because I responded accurately
and truthfully to the question of White House coffees. It turned out to
be three or four instead of one. There were other meetings in a different
building, and I immediately said, okay, look, if you’re asking about this,
here’s the full number.”
TIM RUSSERT: “And I said that. Now it appears there were about
37 coffees that you attended at the White House or the Executive Office
Building next to the White House. When you were asked that question, I
want to give you a chance to clarify this, on the screen, this is what
Mr. Conrad, the prosecutor said, ‘did you have discussions with anyone
concerning the role that coffees would play in raising that type of money?
People reading that conjure up ‘it depends what ‘is’ is.’ . . . People
are being brought into the White House 103 times and you attended 103
of those - high rollers, money - people who gave $8 million within a matter
of weeks, it never occurred to you that you were raising money at the
White House?”
AL GORE: “They were not fund raisers. That’s the simple point.
And, again, this has all been investigated many times, and I put out the
entire transcript of that voluntarily, completely and fully so that people
can make up their own minds about it.”
TIM RUSSERT: “Lanny Davis, Special Counsel to President Clinton,
no more loyal defender and spin doctor for Al Gore and Bill Clinton wrote
a book entitled ‘Truth to Tell.’ This is what he said, ‘months after the
coffee story was over and everyone knew that our denial that the coffees
were about fund-raising had been absurd, it would have been better to
have described these events from the start as fund-raisers and not to
have attempted to deny the obvious.’”
AL GORE: “Well, they were not fund-raisers, so he can - ”
TIM RUSSERT: “He’s wrong?”
AL GORE: “Yeah, as far as I’m concerned he is.” (Al
Gore, NBC’s “Meet The Press,” July 16, 2000) (emphasis added)
Conflicts With Lieberman On The White House Coffees
Lieberman Was Critical Of White House “Coffees.” “This was particularly
true of the White House coffees. The evidence the Committee collected
regarding the many occasions on which attendance at a White House coffee
and a large donation to the DNC temporally coincided is telling. …[A]lthough
money may not have been raised at these coffees, it was certainly raised
from them.” (Sen.
Lieberman, Additional Views, Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Campaign
Finance Investigation Report, March 5, 1997) (emphasis added)
REDUCING THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX
Gore Fights Capital Gains Cut . . .
“Al Gore of Tennessee remained silent as some witnesses suggested approving
the president’s call for a cut in the capital gins tax, which Democrats
have long opposed as a “tax cut for the rich.” (John
Hendren, “Software Makers Tell Congress They want Technology Policy,”
States News Service, November 13, 1991)
Lieberman Supports It
Lieberman On Cutting The Capital Gains Tax. “There's a solid group
of us who feel it is very important for our party politically to stake
out a strong economic growth policy and [cutting] capital gains has to
be a part of that . . . . I’m troubled by the movement [within the party's
leadership] to make opposition to cutting the capital gains tax rate a
party loyalty test,” the Connecticut Democrat said. “It’s not enough anymore
for our party to say that capital gains will benefit rich people over
poor people. A lot of middle class people will also benefit.” (Donald
Lambro, “Capital gains tax cut looms as major political showdown,”
The Washington Times, September 21, 1989)
On Reduction in the Capital Gains Tax Rate. In 1989, the Senate
was debating a tax measure from the House, when Senator Packwood offered
an amendment, which would have reduced the tax rate on capital gains.
The Senate moved to invoke cloture on this matter and Senator Lieberman
voted for the motion. Al Gore voted against it. The motion failed by a
vote of 51-47 on November 19, 1989. (CQ
Vote # 295, Motion rejected 51-47, R 45-0, D 6-47, November 14, 1989)
BIG OIL
Gore Attacks Bush . . .
Gore Attacks Bush. “It takes someone who is independent from Big Oil
to take on Big Oil and I’m independent from them. He’s part of them, always
has been . . . They support him lock, stock and barrel. He supports them
lock, stock and barrel. The contrast is really very clear. I will fight
for the consumer, he fights for Big Oil.” (Terry
M. Neal and Thomas B. Edsall, “Candidates Duke It Out Over Fuel,”
The Washington Post, June 29, 2000)
For Lieberman’s Position
Since 1993, Sen. Lieberman Has Accepted At Least $14,000 In PAC Contributions
From “Big Oil” Companies.
RAISING THE GAS TAX
Gore’s Supports Higher Gas Taxes . . .
“I’ll tell you, that’s the best vote I’ve ever cast in my career.” (Al
Gore, “Remarks at the AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Convention, July 21,
2000, referencing his vote for the 1993 tax bill which increased gas taxes
among other taxes.)
Lieberman Doesn’t
Lieberman Criticized The Gas Tax. “That’s a problem for me. I voted
for amendments on the earlier round that would’ve eliminated the gas tax.
I’m worried that some of the taxes that’re going into effect, particularly
going in immediately, will inhibit this recovery and will also impact
people regardless of their income, including middle-class people, who
we promised to take the pressure off of. So, it’s going to be hard enough
for me to accept the 4.3-cent a gallon gas tax. I don’t want to see it
go any higher” (Sen.
Joseph Lieberman, Interview with Judy Woodruff, CNN, July 27, 1993)
On The Gas Tax. Lieberman was one of only five Democrats in the
Senate to oppose the Clinton/Gore Administration’s effort to impose a
new gas tax of 4.3 cents/gallon on the American people. In 1993, Lieberman
joined Senators Shelby (D-AL), DeConcini (D-AZ), Lautenberg (D-NJ) and
Kohl (D-WI) in voting against an effort to table the Nickles amendment
to eliminate the tax from the Administration’s budget reconciliation.
(CQ Vote # 167:
Motion agreed to 50-48: R 0-43; D 50-5, June 24, 1993)
ETHANOL
Gore’s Position . . .
Gore Attacked Bradley. “Well, let me ask again, you know, we know
you voted against ethanol and tried to kill it and crop insurance and
price supports.” (Al
Gore, Democratic Presidential Debate, January 8, 2000)
Conflicts With Lieberman On Ethanol
Lieberman Voted With Bradley Against Ethanol. While Gore cast the
tie-breaking vote to defeat the Johnston Amendment, prohibiting the Environmental
Protection Agency from implementing its renewable oxygenates rule for
reformulated gasoline, requiring a minimum of 15 percent and eventually
30 percent of the oxygenates used in reformulated gasoline to come from
renewable resources such as ethanol, Lieberman and Bill Bradley voted
no on the motion to (table) kill the amendment. (CQ
Vote #255, H.R. 4624, Motion Agreed to 51-50: R 19-25; D 31-25; August
3, 1994)
Lieberman Voted The Same Way As Bradley On An Ethanol Vote Gore Attacked
Him On. Lieberman joined Bradley in voting no on the Wellstone (D-MN)
Amendment to express the sense of the Senate that any energy (BTU) tax
would not include a tax increase on non-conventional fuels, including
solar, geothermal, wind, ethanol, methanol or bio-mass derived fuels.
(CQ Vote #44, S
Con Res 18, Rejected 48-52: R 11-32; D 37-20, March 23, 1993)
Lieberman Joined Bradley In Killing A Grassley Pro-Ethanol Amendment.
Lieberman joined Bill Bradley in voting yes on the Johnston (D-LA) motion
to table (kill) the Grassley, (R-IA) amendment to require the Secretary
of Energy to ensure that 10 percent of motor fuels consumed in the United
States by the year 2000 and 30 percent by the year 2010 are replacement
and alternative fuels. (CQ
Vote #27, S 2166, Motion agreed to 63-34: R 35-8; D 29-26, February 19,
1992)
Courtesy: Republican National Committee
News
| Lies | Hypocrisy
| Scandals | Quotes
| GI Gore
Communist Ties | Tool
Of Big Oil | Weed Life | Friends
| Top Of The Page
[Next Site] [Skip
1 Site] [Next
5 Sites] [Previous]
[Random]
[JOIN!]
|
|||||||||
 |
