A new study bolsters Hillary Clinton’s case that the country isin need of a major overhaul on mental health.

The study, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, finds that themajority of Americans who screen positive for depression do not receive anytreatment of the condition. That is despite the fact that mostpeople who do receive psychiatric treatment are not clinicallydepressed.

A survey of more than 46,000 U.S. adults found that 8.7 percentreported symptoms of depression androughly 8 percent reporting receiving treatment for depression. Andyet, those two groups of people were not one and the same. Not evenclose.

Among those deemed to be depressed by the survey, only 27percent are getting treatment. And among those who are receivingtreatment, less than 30 percent are determined by the survey to bedepressed.

The counterintuitive trends clearly have something to do withincome barriers. The poor are much more likely to report symptomsof depression the study found, but much less likely to receivecare.

It is in this context of dramatic treatment disparities thatClinton is making her case for a major mental health initiativefrom the federal level. But whether it is realistic, politically orfinancially, is an entirely different question.

The lengthy policy document that Clinton unveiled this weekincludes many pledges to improve care for mental illness inschools, prisons and community health centers, but includedrelatively few details on how the plan would be paid for,particularly by a Congress that is expected to be at leastpartially controlled by Republicans.

“Ultimately, Congress has the final say,” Ronald Honberg, seniorpolicy adviser with the National Alliance on Mental Illness, toldModern Healthcare. “We can only be optimistic... that the climate will be conducive to action.”

There is some evidence that Republicans will be less hostile tomental health initiatives than other social programs traditionallypushed by Democrats. For one, some Republicans have framed mentalhealth treatment as an alternative to gun control in the wake ofthe spike in mass shootings in recent years. Rather than focusingon preventing the mentally ill from buying guns, they have argued,the government should focus on preventing mental illness from theget-go.

Recognizing that presidents rarely accomplish everything theypromise to do as candidates, some advocates are appreciative thatClinton is emphasizing the issue of mental health, signaling thatat least something significant will be done on the issue.

“There is an emerging bipartisan consensus toward action today,”writes Paul Gionfriddo, president of Mental Health America, in ablog post. “This plan rests solidly within thatconsensus and adds to it. We applaud Secretary Clinton for offeringit, and look forward to the day that mental health is truly seen asan essential part of overall health, and the brain as a mostessential part of the body.”

But while Gionfriddo applaudes the plan’s emphasis on earlyinterventions and treatment of all types of mental illness, D.J.Jaffe, executive director of mentalillnesspolicy.org, told USA Today that Clinton’s agenda doesn't doenough to address treatment of those who are suffering from themost severe mental illnesses and require more intense care.

"It is the most seriously ill adults — those with untreatedschizophrenia and bipolar disorder — who are most likely to becomehomeless, psychotic, arrested, incarcerated and suicidal," he said."Our current system prioritizes the least seriously ill andoffloads the others to jails. This plan will continue thatpractice. "