This article in the New York Times gives an overview of what would have happened if the US Supreme Court had not ruled Medicaid expansion was optional for states under the ACA. Twenty-four states opted not to expand, and this analysis suggests three million more Americans would have health care, compliments of Medicaid, if they had. As you can see in the maps, many of the southern states were the hold outs, both for political reasons and for fear they would not be able to foot the bill in later years. For participants, Medicaid premiums are typically low, as are out-of-pocket costs when care is needed. The disadvantage of Medicaid compared to employer-sponsored coverage is that it can sometimes be difficult to find doctors who will treat Medicaid members. But surveys have shown that the program is popular among the people who use it. Employers may have already benefited in 2014 if low-paid employees who qualified elected to enroll in Medicaid rather than sign up for their employer-sponsored plan.
Go to full article: www.nytimes.com