"Obamacare’s most popular provisions are its least well known"

[RgrF]

With laws regulating operation of ERs, pretty much everyone now has emergency health care. ACA, at it's most basic level, is about how to redistribute cost of that care. It's about a lot more but what opponents don't seem to get is they are already paying for that basic ER care.

[Mike Sellers]

samintx wrote:
....taxpayers will be paying for all the wonderful benefits…

Do you honestly think we're not paying for them now?

[Bill in NC]

ACA pulls people who would at best have had Medicaid coverage (which has significant restrictions on types of care & medicines) into 'regular' health plans, where the majority of those paying for health insurance will now be directly impacted through increased premiums.

And ACA mandates such as unlimited lifetime benefit do nothing but _increase_ those premiums.

RgrF wrote:
With laws regulating operation of ERs, pretty much everyone now has emergency health care. ACA, at it's most basic level, is about how to redistribute cost of that care. It's about a lot more but what opponents don't seem to get is they are already paying for that basic ER care.

[Blurb]

samintx wrote:
The exchanges are great for the first 3 years till the states have to start paying. Then the Sh*&^ hits the fan. Look at those goodies....taxpayers will be paying for all the wonderful benefits or they lead to single payers and the govt controlling us even more.

Oh dear, Suzanne. After the first 3 years, the states will go from paying 0% to 7% of the total costs of the Medicaid expansion! That is horrible! Please read the bill for the facts, instead of listening to pundits. First 3 years are covered 100% by federal dollars, then decreases to 93% federal coverage with states kicking in 7%.

If people knew the facts, they would be appalled that their repub governors are even considering not accepting medicaid expansion. They are denying access to care for the neediest in their states at NO cost to the state!

[Ted King]

Blurb wrote:

If people knew the facts, they would be appalled that their repub governors are even considering not accepting medicaid expansion. They are denying access to care for the neediest in their states at NO cost to the state!

The fact you mention - that state governments don't have to participate in Medicaid expansion - pretty much makes any concerns about the states "having to" take on more costs after three years a moot point. It's an opt in, so when they opt in they should be fully aware of what costs they will be responsible for in the future - IOW, they will make the choice so it's obviously not a "have to" situation.