When the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was enacted in 2010 it required all states to expand their Medicaid programs to include people with incomes slightly higher than those allowed under traditional Medicaid, as well as groups, like childless adults, that had not previously been covered. In 2012 the Supreme Court ruled that forcing States to expand their Medicaid coverage was unconstitutional. Since then 22 states have expanded their coverage and more than 35 have opted not to do so. Proponents of the expansion argue that it will lower healthcare costs for everyone by reducing the number of Americans without health insurance. Opponents argue that states should be allowed to run their own Medicaid programs without the intervention of the federal government.
Yes but there should be a way to work yourself off government subsidies but medical coverage should be the very last thing to be stopped any only when the work place covers health care or the income is such that the worker can afford health care.
I prefer switching Medicaid to a single payer system for those who can prove that they need it and monitoring the system for fraud and abuse like pill mills, drs. who over prescribe, especially opiods and addictive or unwarranted drugs and appliances.
It would seem that if my state opted in that my property, sales and state income tax would have to increase to absorb this. If this is the case it would impact me the same. I don’t think the federal government should have their hands in private sector.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.