Efforts to repeal ACA have run into real political trouble. Even in Arkansas and other conservative states, angry town hall crowds are berating Republican legislators over the issue. President Trump’s poll numbers are sinking. For the first time, the majority of Americans express support for ACA, too. Efforts to roll back ACA’s Medicaid expansion have proved particularly difficult. Democratic and Republican Governors oppose the idea. So do many other key constituencies.
The politics changed after November 8 because the real choices are starkly before us: If ACA is repealed, what will actually happen to millions of vulnerable Americans who rely on ACA for essential health care and coverage?
Facing these stark questions, some conservatives bluntly maintain that we should snatch health coverage from millions of people. The brutality of such arguments makes them politically self-immolating. So the search is on for kinder and gentler talking points against the ACA. In a creative bit of political jujitsu, conservatives argue that Obamacare itself harms the vulnerable, and that we must repeal ACA to really help the most deserving.
A particularly brazen argument is now making the rounds. On this account, ACA’s Medicaid expansion for able-bodied poor people harms the most vulnerable by siphoning away state funds that would otherwise finance disability services. If you aren’t steeped in Medicaid or disability policy, this argument sounds plausible.
I consider the realities here, at healthinsurance.org.