Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

drm604

(16,230 posts)
Thu Jun 28, 2012, 01:24 PM Jun 2012

Does someone have a good explanation of the Medicaid part of the ruling?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/06/28/live-blog-of-scotus-obamacare-ruling
THE ENTIRE ACA IS UPHELD WITH EXCEPTION THAT THE FEERAL [sic] GOVERNMENT’S POWER TO TERMINATE STATES’ MEDICAID FUNDS IS NARROWLY READ.

Okay. As I understand it, the act requires states to expand Medicaid coverage to include new classes of people, and it threatens to cut off Medicaid funding to those states that refuse to do so.

So what does it mean to say that the Federal Government's power to terminate Medicaid funds is narrowly read? Apparently the power is limited in some way, but how?

I know that narrow reading means to interpret something as narrowly as possible; strictly by the literal meaning of the text. How does that apply in this case?

What are the implications of this part of the ruling?
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does someone have a good explanation of the Medicaid part of the ruling? (Original Post) drm604 Jun 2012 OP
As I understand it Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #1
My understanding in a nutshell Lone_Star_Dem Jun 2012 #2
I'm thinking that this weakens the act more than we realize. drm604 Jun 2012 #3
Yes, you are SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2012 #4
That's my assessment. Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #5
I think it does. And yes we are right to be concerned. eom Autumn Jun 2012 #6

Puzzledtraveller

(5,937 posts)
1. As I understand it
Thu Jun 28, 2012, 01:29 PM
Jun 2012

The current medicaid funding to those states that do not expand services under the ACA cannot have their funding reduced as a consequence. This to me is actually pretty big, more so than the "tax" language applied by the SCOTUS, which has it's own problems. ACA may have stayed afloat but it did take on some water.

Lone_Star_Dem

(28,158 posts)
2. My understanding in a nutshell
Thu Jun 28, 2012, 01:30 PM
Jun 2012

The states which choose not to raise Medicaid eligibility criteria will not get the extra money allotted to them for such a raise. However, they will still receive all the previous Medicaid money allotted to them under the current criteria.

SickOfTheOnePct

(7,290 posts)
4. Yes, you are
Thu Jun 28, 2012, 07:01 PM
Jun 2012

This is a huge hit to the poor that currentlly make too much to qualify for Medicaid, but don't make enough to qualify for the premium subsidies.

I read an estimate today that if all 50 states opt out (which they won't, obviously), ~15 million people will be left with no way to get health coverage.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does someone have a good ...