,
13 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
This is so morally repugnant it's worth a thread.
The original design of the ACA more or less strong armed states into expanding Medicaid, as a primary means of expanding coverage
SCOTUS ruled the mechanism to enforce expansion was unconstituionally heavy handed (wrong, imho, but w/e) and so states went their own way
Keep in mind it was conservative GOP state AGs who sued to create the possibility of opting out, and once they won, those states did.
The result was a huge amount of human misery for basically no reason other than sticking it to libs and Obama.
The states that opted out could, of course, opt in, and receive billions of dollars of federal money to provide insurance to working poor
But they've decided this is some kind of weird insult to their dignity, so now you've got a bill that will explicitly PUNISH the states
that chose to expand coverage and accept federal money and reward the states that didn't. There's no real policy rationale here.
Oh! And my favorite part. The one VERY thin read that opponents of expansion have marshalled is the idea that state share of $ will go up
Meaning, that while it's basically free money in early years, down the road US gov will demand states pay more. But here's the thing:
Graham-Cassidy has NO revenue source or word on cost-sharing out past the ten year window! Takes the problem and makes it much much worse.
Anway, the entire rationale here is: 1) Cut Medcaid 2) Blockgrant it 3) Take from the "bad" states that tried to cover people...
and give to the "good" ones that didn't. It's an elborate policy of Liberal Tears that will cause widespread misery for millions. <fin>
