When SCOTUS heard the oral arguments in March 2012, one of the two major decisions SCOTUS had to decide was if the added cost that each state would automatically incur, a violation of the Constitution with respect to State Sovereignty. On June 28, 2013 SCOTUS ruled that, yes, the government can compel the individual to buy insurance or be subject to a penalty, but upheld State Sovereignty laws.
For information about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, visit: http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf.
Each State is only obligated to do the current Medicaid to the indigent and poor, as per each States powers and rules, with their own Medicaid program for their poor (approx: no more than $9600 annual income). Each State as ruled by SCOTUS (6-3) has the right to decline the EXPANSION portion of this program. SCOTUS did in fact recognize the enormous cost this would be to each State’s fiscal budget, once the federal funding dropped for the EXPANSION portion of Obamacare. Currently a minimum of 28-35% of a state’s annual fiscal budget is for Medicaid.
Many States have chosen to decline the Medicaid Expansion due to the fact that it is not a financially sustainable budget the State could afford once the three year federal funds ceased. Texas is one of them. The reason? Because after the third year, the federal government will no longer fund the expansion portion to the states. The States would then be on their own to raise the additional revenue to cover the cost of the expansion portion of Medicaid.
“The thoughts and opinions expressed in this article are not to be taken as legal advice. The ACA changes on a daily basis and the material covered is a reflection of the author’s research into the bill on a given day. While every attempt is made to communicate with accuracy you should consult your lawyer or CPA for advice on how the ACA will affect you and your situation.”
Tags:
