When the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was enacted in 2010 it required all states to expand their Medicaid programs to include people with incomes slightly higher than those allowed under traditional Medicaid, as well as groups, like childless adults, that had not previously been covered. In 2012 the Supreme Court ruled that forcing States to expand their Medicaid coverage was unconstitutional. Since then 22 states have expanded their coverage and more than 35 have opted not to do so. Proponents of the expansion argue that it will lower healthcare costs for everyone by reducing the number of Americans without health insurance. Opponents argue that states should be allowed to run their own Medicaid programs without the intervention of the federal government.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs
Yes, but I prefer switching to a single payer healthcare system
@ISIDEWITH7yrs
Yes, but only increase for the elderly and disabled
@ISIDEWITH7yrs
No, and abolish Medicaid
@ISIDEWITH7yrs
No, and each state should decide their own level of coverage
@ISIDEWITH7yrs
No, and eligibility should only include the elderly and disabled
@ISIDEWITH7yrs
No, and the federal government should not increase funding for any social programs
@8FR53X52yrs
Yes but the current guidelines are trash and to easy to screw the statem
This system needs to be less complicated and allow healthcare professionals to determine what is best for people’s health
It would seem that if my state opted in that my property, sales and state income tax would have to increase to absorb this. If this is the case it would impact me the same. I don’t think the federal government should have their hands in private sector.
@964DQQ66hrs
Only For Severely Disabled People who has Disabilities Preventing Them from performing ANY Kind of Work. Example: Severe Autism, like the hardest areas to live with. Such as ones with OCD, Obsessions, Mental Disorders, being unable to speak, type, or write.
@964CR7L9hrs
Yes, but they should be monitored closer so only those who truly are lower income receive NOT! Illegal aliens! Not those who are too lazy or choose not to work.
@964BG5W12hrs
Abolish medicare, institute mandatory Medicaid coverage for under 18's and over 65's and require it to cover out of state treatment and prescription costs with no copayments. Allow for subsidized coverage of insurance from 18-26 on parents plan.
@9646SH917hrs
Leave it just like it is now.
@9646KYK18hrs
The government should better allocate the resources they already have and make the programs more efficient.
@9646C8618hrs
I need to learn more before stating an opinion
@9644G9322hrs
No, but the larger problem needs to be addressed.
@96436TH1 day
Yes, and for all individuals.
@963R9B92 days
I've been on medicaid and I've never had any issues.
@963Q93V2 days
Insurance for healthcare should be removed because hospitals only charge large amounts in order to make some money back because insurance cuts a lot of the price. The government should still aid people who can't afford to pay medical bills by paying the hospital fees in full
@963PCJQ2 days
I would have to do my own research before I answer that.
@963NF3H2 days
Yes, but also cover any incident not just the surface which would be the annual check up
@963H5F5Republican2 days
Depends on if they are willing to put in the work to keep themselves healthy.
@963BLK22 days
I don't understand this ?
@963B48JRepublican2 days
Yes, particularly for those from broken/incomplete households without both parents.
@96388T62 days
Yes but not individuals who refuse to work
@96336V62 days
No, and they should create barriers to prevent the abuse of the social welfare system
@962YMDT2 days
Yes, but just for limited and serious circumstances.
@962VSFM3 days
I need to learn more before I develop an opinion
@962V7ZG3 days
No, federal government should rather help the low incomes more when it comes to hospital bills & etc
@962RLYR3 days
Yes, and everyone should have the right to free healthcare.
@962Q4Y93 days
@962LX9B3 days
Yes mostly but the state decides the details
@962LCP4Independent3 days
yes but only for poor single income familes, elderly, and the disabled
@962KF8H3 days
No because people will try to take advantage of it, what I think is that they should increase funding for the elderly or mentally and physically disabled to help them be able to life a long healthy life
@962JCH43 days
Yes but not to the point where the citizen is getting an abundance of money and not working or acquiring a job.
@962J4PH3 days
yes for senior and mentally challenged individuals
@962GBZB3 days
to be honest i feel like healthcare doesnt matter if your gonna die
Yes, but only for working individuals/families or single mothers that have a child under 3 years old.
@fourspaced3 days
Medical services should cost less
@962BNSB3 days
Yes but also help teen that no longer live with parents to have for them and if there pregnant and more
@9627CPJ3 days
I think that there should be a set income for everyone and it should be met from any income level.
@96239YY3 days
they need to provide other resources rather than just throwing money at people such as making health insurance and medical treatment affordable
@95ZZZZV3 days
Yes, but I prefer a more socialized healthcare system to lower patient’s costs
@95ZXKH23 days
No, instead try to get these low-income families to the middle class through other policies.
@95ZWG384 days
Yes so the individual can get treatment for an illness if they need it that might make them hospital ridden for months and they can't pay that bill.
@95ZVL2WRepublican4 days
Yes, but there needs to be proof of imployment
@95ZSLNQ4 days
I'm split because it is helpful both ways
@95ZM3JW4 days
Reform the whole system to be more efficient
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
