Let’s go crazy: Bachmann votes against mental health parity

By Paul Demko
Wednesday, September 24, 2008 at 4:56 pm

Rep. Michele Bachmann was the only member of the Minnesota delegation to vote against legislation requiring health-insurance companies to treat mental illnesses the same as physical ailments. The Sen. Paul Wellstone Mental Health Equitable Treatment Act passed the House yesterday by a 376-47 margin. The legislation has long been championed by retiring Republican Rep. Jim Ramstad. It is expected to be taken up by the Senate soon and President Bush has promised to sign the measure.

Elwyn Tinklenberg, who is challenging Bachmann in the Sixth Congressional District, released a statement criticizing the freshman legislator’s opposition to the bill. “Bachmann’s vote is a moral failure to look out for some of our most vulnerable citizens,” Tinklenberg said. “It is this kind of extremism that is preventing real healthcare reform in our country. We need to start prioritizing people’s health and wellness over the profits of the insurance companies.”

Comments

7 Comments

George Hayduke
Comment posted September 24, 2008 @ 5:41 pm

Maybe the legislation didn’t cover faith-based treatments like those offered at Marcus Bachmann’s Pray Away the Gay Clinic in Lake Elmo.

andy
Comment posted September 25, 2008 @ 10:49 am

For Republicans like Bachmann, mental illness isn’t an fault, it’s a feature. Making it easier to pay for treatment would be nibbling away at her own base…

eb
Comment posted September 25, 2008 @ 10:55 am

This could be a seriously compelling argument in the 6th on why Bachmann has to go. This issue crosses all party and religious affiliations.

Ardis Wexler
Comment posted September 25, 2008 @ 11:40 am

I’m not in her district but I cannot begin to understand how she could vote against this legislation. Seems this is the ultimate slap in the face of those constituents most in need.

Craig Westover
Comment posted September 25, 2008 @ 4:37 pm

Or perhaps it is because there is no constitutional authority for Congress to dictate the specific terms of private contracts? Seems like constitutional protections don’t matter to the left any more than they matter to the right.

The right wants to take away personal liberty; the left wants to take away economic liberty. As one wag noted: We have an evil party and a stupid party and sometimes they get together and do something both evil and stupid; they call that “bipartisanship.”

andy
Comment posted September 25, 2008 @ 11:31 pm

The Left doesn’t want to “take away economic liberty”, whatever that is supposed to be. The Left wants to set some standards. Would you consider child labor laws blows to economic liberty as well?