The other point, about the "poor person in Alabama." The ACA also provides for money to encourage states to expand the coverage offered by Medicaid for people up to 133% of the poverty line. The Supreme Court struck down the part of the ACA which would have penalized states for not expanding medicaid, but left standing the part of the law providing generous subsidies to states for Medicaid expansion (100% of costs now, eventually coming down to 90%).
In other words, after 2014, if that "poor person in Alabama" isn't covered by Medicaid, it won't be because of Obama, but rather because the state of Alabama has decided to refuse the federal money that would have given her Medicaid.
Now, I suspect Alabama just might be dumb enough to turn down that money, but if they do, we'll know who to blame, right?
And you don't think that as part of some future DC budget deal, the Feds might not decrease their share to something less than 90%? I certainly do. so I won't blame States for being worried that the expanded Medicaid could turn into a budget trap.
Poll
