I’m expecting the Supremes to gut Obamacare. Whatever gets salvaged will be done to benefit the insurance industry. MA stands to lose $400 ml unless that money gets directed here from some other new source which I suppose is always possible. Just mentioning this because MA hospitals are probably already talking about making cuts to make up for the money they see themselves losing down the road…
-Mary
Experts: Court could put health-care onus on Mass.
By Christine McConville and Hillary Chabot
Thursday, March 29, 2012 –
A possible Supreme Court decision to gut so-called Obamacare won’t affect the Bay State’s own universal health care law, but such a ruling could be financially devastating, jeopardizing as much as $400 million a year the state now receives in federal medical funding, experts said.
“If they did toss out the whole law, it would be a huge financial hit to Massachusetts,” said Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics professor Jonathan Gruber, who helped craft both the Massachusetts and the federal plans.
“Right now, in Massachusetts, the state pays for half of the plan, and the federal government pays the rest. If we lose the federal funding, we’d have to come up with another $350 million to $400 million each year, to keep this going,” Gruber said. He explained that if Obama-care survives the Supreme Court, the federal government would pick up the entire cost of insuring the poor in Massachusetts after 2014. If Obamacare is dismantled, Massachusetts will be left holding those costs alone.
But Boston University health law professor Kevin Outterson said the Supreme Court decision, due in June, isn’t likely to undermine the legal basis of the Massachusetts law.
“The Conservatives on the Court agree that states have powers that the feds don’t,” Outterson told the Herald in an email.
The Supreme Court concluded three days of hearings yesterday on the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Justices’ questions raised concerns among Obamacare advocates and hopes among opponents that the court could move to dismantle universal health care.
A key topic of their questioning was whether the health care law could survive if the individual mandate were struck down.
“My approach would say, if you take the heart out of the statute, the statute is gone,” Justice Antonin Scalia declared.
Justice Elena Kagan countered that “half a loaf is better than no loaf.”
Conservatives have reviled Obama’s overhaul and treated former Gov. Mitt Romney with suspicion because he authored the so-called Romneycare plan in the Bay State that served as the blueprint for Obama’s law.
Some Bay State pundits say a Supreme Court decision to scuttle the health care reforms could help both Obama and Romney, because the controversial law wouldn’t be hanging over either candidate in the height of the general election in the fall.
“Romney could focus on the economy, and if gas prices continue to rise, he could play to consumer fears,” said Boston University political history professor Thomas Whalen. “It could be of greater importance to Democrats. Talk about mobilizing your party’s base. If this is overturned, it would spark liberals to rally around Obama in large numbers.”
A possible Supreme Court decision to gut so-called Obamacare won’t affect the Bay State’s own universal health care law, but such a ruling could be financially devastating, jeopardizing as much as $400 million a year the state now receives in federal medical funding, experts said.
“If they did toss out the whole law, it would be a huge financial hit to Massachusetts,” said Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics professor Jonathan Gruber, who helped craft both the Massachusetts and the federal plans.
“Right now, in Massachusetts, the state pays for half of the plan, and the federal government pays the rest. If we lose the federal funding, we’d have to come up with another $350 million to $400 million each year, to keep this going,” Gruber said. He explained that if Obama-care survives the Supreme Court, the federal government would pick up the entire cost of insuring the poor in Massachusetts after 2014. If Obamacare is dismantled, Massachusetts will be left holding those costs alone.
But Boston University health law professor Kevin Outterson said the Supreme Court decision, due in June, isn’t likely to undermine the legal basis of the Massachusetts law.
“The Conservatives on the Court agree that states have powers that the feds don’t,” Outterson told the Herald in an email.
The Supreme Court concluded three days of hearings yesterday on the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Justices’ questions raised concerns among Obamacare advocates and hopes among opponents that the court could move to dismantle universal health care.
A key topic of their questioning was whether the health care law could survive if the individual mandate were struck down.
“My approach would say, if you take the heart out of the statute, the statute is gone,” Justice Antonin Scalia declared.
Justice Elena Kagan countered that “half a loaf is better than no loaf.”
Conservatives have reviled Obama’s overhaul and treated former Gov. Mitt Romney with suspicion because he authored the so-called Romneycare plan in the Bay State that served as the blueprint for Obama’s law.
Some Bay State pundits say a Supreme Court decision to scuttle the health care reforms could help both Obama and Romney, because the controversial law wouldn’t be hanging over either candidate in the height of the general election in the fall.
“Romney could focus on the economy, and if gas prices continue to rise, he could play to consumer fears,” said Boston University political history professor Thomas Whalen. “It could be of greater importance to Democrats. Talk about mobilizing your party’s base. If this is overturned, it would spark liberals to rally around Obama in large numbers.”
Herald wire services contributed to this report.
“
