Thread by @charles_gaba

Deleted a tweet because some folks who should know better thought I was *siding* with Manchin on this.

To be clear: Yes, it *could* technically end up "rewarding" the non-expansion states *depending on how it's done* by letting them off the hook for their share. HOWEVER...

https://twitter.com/CitizenCohn/status/1452738672265154564

1. The way the bill is currently written, those states would be required to pay the same 10% of the cost as if they expanded Medicaid anyway, making it moot--the only way they'd be "rewarded" is, ironically, if the "Fedicaid" portion is removed by, say, MANCHIN;

2. Even if it does "reward" them, as @FishmanEliot correctly notes, it's STILL far more important to get those caught in the Medicaid Gap covered than to "refuse to cave" to non-expansion state GOP leadership.

For a real world example of this, by the way, look no further than MISSOURI, which did indeed expand Medicaid via ballot proposal last year, but nearly didn't proceed anyway because the Gov/GOP legislature refused to do so in violation of the state Constitution.

The #AmRescuePlan included something like a BILLION DOLLARS as an "incentive" to get them to do something THEY WERE ALREADY LEGALLY & CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED TO DO. Yet they still refused.

A judge forced them to do it...so they get the billion anyway.

acasignups.net/21/07/22/misso…