Comments on: Wellstone Bill Attached to Economic Rescue Plan

By: Question

Question — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:36:08 +0000

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDING MENTAL HEALTH PARITY?? My GOD are any of the ‘news’ organizations going to let us know who is responsible? WHO ADDED IT??? Sheesh!

By: south metro dem

south metro dem — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 06:02:59 +0000

I don’t live in CD3, but Ramstead is one the few repubs I would have considered voting for. Good on him for making sure the mental health parity bill passes before he exits the house. Depression is an illness that deserves coverage in health plans, as is serious mental illness that leads to stabbing children. This story from last summer is just a recent example of inadequate care for people in mental health crisis.

http://www.startribune.com/local/east/27284789.html?elr=KArksUUUU

Adding mental health parity and renewable energy tax breaks were the best part of that turkey of a bailout bill. Makes more sense to me to object to some of the other pork - tax breaks for kids arrows? All earmarks are not created equal.

I wouldn’t mind getting rid of earmarks altogether, just so people would have to focus on the deficit that remains. With rising costs of healthcare, soc. security, defense, and interest on the debt, cutting spending will not realistically solve our budget problems. Bring on Tax hikes for the rich!

On a different note- I have been trying to interpret J. Kline’s vote in favor of the bailout bill. Is it due to concern or complete lack of concern for his reelection prospects. My view is it’s looking hopeless for Sarvi.

By: DantheMan

DantheMan — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:09:49 +0000

“I expect my Senators and Congresscritters to bring home some pork… bitch all you want about it but tax dollars coming back to Minnesota are not a bad thing.”

That is what has gotten Government into such a bad spot. The attitude of “well, if it is going to happen anyway, I’m at least going to get mine”. Pure crap.

I’m just trying to imagine the conversation that concluded these are all linked:

“The economy is in jeapordy. Banks are freezing lending — they are all worried about money flow. Without lending, businesses will have to scale way back. What do we do?”

“Quick — Make sure that health insurance covers depression therapy.”

“Whew… thanks!”

By: lojasmo

lojasmo — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:24:25 +0000

This rider was a small gem in a pile of dung. I’m glad some good was done.

By: Kerosene Hat

Kerosene Hat — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:39:43 +0000

The game is what it is because too many people think the rules aren’t their responsibility. That all they have to do is “win” within the playbook the inherited. It was the same rationale people used to continue slavery or keep women from voting. It is the last excuse of the coward.

It is our government, we are responsible not only for it’s actions but also the rules by which it governs.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:54:31 +0000

I don’t believe that it has to be this way at all. Ramstad doesn’t have to play the game at all; none of the congressmen and senators do. They could take a principled, philosophical stand on every issue and I would consider that to be the best work he could do for me. Further, I don’t consider handouts, earmarks, pork and the like — the result of the game — working for me, I consider that working against me. There are other congressmen who get by without playing the game, and those are the ones I can respect.

It is worth noting that the system has not always worked the way it does now. Earmarking didn’t start until the 1800’s. The Federal Government of the past had far more limited scope than we have now as well. And, regardless, just because something is a certain way doesn’t mean there aren’t alternatives and certainly doesn’t mean it’s not worth trying to change.

Anyway, if you guys are fine with politics being a game, so be it, I’m not out to change anyone’s mind on that front. The game is wrong, and just because it’s hard to change doesn’t make it any less reprehensible to accept the status quo merely because it’s convenient. It is my preference to use my brain, think on things both practically and philosophically, and work for an ideal rather than throwing up my hands and dealing with what I was dealt, but to each his or her own.

By: amuseinc

amuseinc — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:30:34 +0000

Don’t mean to be a jerk, but i wish I had a nickel for every-time I heard somebody screech… “That isn’t how it is supposed to be…” Politics is a game. It is about compromise. Politics is show business for ugly people. And it is the way it is, never has been the “supposed to be” that various people propose.

This bailout bill is only going to move with some grease on it. I consider Ramstad’s Mental Health Bill a mighty small bit of grease compared to what else is probably in that bill. And to add to this I expect my Senators and Congresscritters to bring home some pork… bitch all you want about it but tax dollars coming back to Minnesota are not a bad thing. Just take a look at the statistics for dollars sent to Washington versus dollars sent back and note that Republican states ARE pork ridden more than the Blue States.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:26:10 +0000

If Ramstad doesn’t “play the game” he can’t “work for you.” That is how the system works, how it has always worked, and how it always will work. Being mad about it is like being mad that its cold in the winter and dark at night.

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:23:18 +0000

I agree with Brian.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:20:01 +0000

No, I’ll go ahead and hate the player too. Nothing is forcing him or anyone to play it. If they wanted to change it, they could. If he got elected by saying “I’ll play the game (at your expense)!” rather than saying “I’ll work for you!”, you’d have a point, but he didn’t.