59 Republicans voted against even scaled-back health care for 9/11 first responders. Among them, unsurprisingly, is Michele Bachman, who boasted about her “no” vote:

The last vote taken by this Congress offered a sad commentary on the abysmal lame duck session that was run by the Democrat[ic] majority. Almost 40 percent of House members were not even present for the vote on the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. Additionally, Members of Congress have a responsibility to review bills before they vote, but Speaker Pelosi hurried this bill through, disregarding normal House procedure. The heroes who responded on 9/11 deserve to be made whole, but the measure which passed the House today falls short, and that’s why I voted against it. …

At a time when government spending is out-of-control this Congress should not have pushed a bill with more than $4 billion in new spending through this lame duck session.

So, she’s proud to vote against health care for 9/11 heroes because…

1. Almost 40 percent of House members were not even present for the vote. Why is this? It’s because Republicans stopped the bill from being voted on earlier, and have been obstructing it for a few years. It had to be handled now because it is unlikely the next House, run by Republicans, would pass the bill at all. Not the Democrats’ or the legislation’s fault that so many Congresspeople left town before business was finished, nor is it material in any way otherwise–about the same number of Democrats left as Republicans, and their being present would not have changed the outcome. So this point is totally irrelevant.
2. Members of Congress have a responsibility to review bills before they vote, but Speaker Pelosi hurried this bill through, disregarding normal House procedure. Considering that the bill was introduced almost two years ago and was voted on in the House in September, one would think Bachmann and everyone else would be familiar with the bill by now. The Senate amended it–but these amendments were proposed by Republicans, not Democrats. If Bachmann doesn’t know what her own party is doing, then she can only blame herself. But we can be certain that (a) she (and all other Republicans in the House) knew damn well exactly what was in the bill, and (b) are demanding something that would simply kill the bill–which is what they want.
3. At a time when government spending is out-of-control… …because of the GOP’s wars and massive tax cuts for the rich…
4. This Congress should not have pushed a bill with more than $4 billion in new spending. Um… this bill’s costs are paid for [PDF]–plus several tens of millions of dollars to boot–by a 2% excise tax on foreign manufacturers selling to the U.S. government. Bachmann was perfectly fine with hundreds of billions of dollars, unpaid for, spent on tax cuts for rich people who don’t need them, but health care for 9/11 first responders which is paid for is “out of control spending.”

Bachmann even claimed she voted no on the bill, cut by 40% by her party, because it “falls short.” I suppose that by “falls short,” she meant that the bill should have been cut down to zero instead of just down to $4.2 billion. She certainly could not mean that she herself wanted more to be spent, as she clearly pointed out that even $4.2 billion is too much spending.

Either that or she’s just throwing together a heap of nonsensical B.S. to explain off why she is being a heartless ass, especially right before Christmas. But that couldn’t be.