Rep. Michele Bachmann. Photo: Photo: Gage Skidmore
Rep. Michele Bachmann. Photo: Photo: Gage Skidmore

Bachmann was against veterans benefits before she was for them

By Jon Collins
Friday, September 02, 2011 at 10:52 am

During U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann’s speech at the annual convention of the American Legion in Minneapolis Thursday, she vowed to support and strengthen veterans medical care, but a plan unveiled by Bachmann in January, which she later dropped, proposed to cut $4.5 billion from these same veterans services.

“It is our duty, first and primarily, to protect our veterans and to make sure that you receive not only the respect, but also the care that you have paid for very heavily with your service to our nation,” Bachmann told members of the American Legion Thursday. “As president, I will assure that those who serve today as well, and in the past, have the highest access to the best care, both of health, mental health and rehabilitative care that the world has to offer.”

But Bachmann’s January plan, which was touted as a way to avoid raising the debt ceiling, would have brought about dramatic cuts to veterans services.

“Instead of making it easier for Washington to spend more of your tax dollars, I’m calling for Congress to do the hard work of making real and necessary cuts in federal spending,” according to a January statement that included the cuts on Bachmann’s House website.

Her plan would have frozen U.S. Department of Veterans Administration health care costs and cut disability payments, according to a January report in the Army Times. Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, told the Times that Bachmann’s proposal was “astonishing.” The Army Times charted the origin of the veterans cuts to an October 2010 report from the conservative Heritage Foundation.

It was just the next month that Bachmann started to backpedal in a statement on her website:

“One point on my discussion list was a $4.5 billion proposal that would affect payments made to our veterans. That discussion point has received a lot of attention and I have decided to remove it from consideration. The problem of government spending must be solved, but not on the backs of our nation’s war heroes. I have always been a proud supporter of the United States military and I continue to stand with our veterans.  In the months ahead I look forward to working with our Veterans Service Organizations to ensure that we fulfill our commitments to those who sacrificed so much in their brave service for our country.”

Bachmann’s campaign did not immediately return a request for an explanation of Bachmann’s earlier stance on funding veterans services.

Follow Jon Collins on Twitter


Comments

5 Comments

Roman
Comment posted September 3, 2011 @ 10:35 am

Bachmann’s a grifter who’s in way over her head. Her ideas run from alarming to confusing while her support changes, depending on what will fuel her religious ambitions to satisfy her angry disciples.


Charlie
Comment posted September 5, 2011 @ 1:58 pm

Politicians often espouse ideas that they hope will place them in a spotlight.
When the idea or stand is obviously unpopular with those who put the politician in office, you can expect that any politician will try to change their constituents perception.

The stand against veteran’s benefits is actually quite old, and is not an uncommon one in the world. After all, the veteran’s perceived usefulness changed once the veteran became disabled, or even just a veteran instead of a service member on active duty.

(Change from an asset to a liability)

As a result, many politicians as well as members of the general populace see veteran’s benefits as a form of welfare. The fact that the benefits are based upon law and the governments responsibilities as the governments side of enlistment contracts is not material to quite a few, and something to be gotten out of if at all possible.

The Agent Orange debacle is a prime example. The effects of dioxin exposure have been known, at least in part, since the early 1900′s. The governments attempts to weasel out of the consequences of permitting the dioxin contaminants in De-foliants is reprehensible, and shows a lack of concern for it’s veterans and citizens, not to mention such things as morality, justice, and equity.


SCHud
Comment posted September 5, 2011 @ 6:35 pm

As a result of what she said about cutting veterans benefits, I do not trust her for anything concerning veterans.


ray
Comment posted September 6, 2011 @ 7:21 am

as being a disabled vet
bachman please stay out of veterans affairs please
we dont need your help and most dont want it from you any ways
you showed it when you tried to cut vet,s benefits last year
shame on you


kim
Comment posted September 13, 2011 @ 1:20 am

she lost my vote!!!!!

Disabled Vet


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.