Falling into the gap.

Midsummer 2012 the supreme court upheld the majority of the provisions of the ACA, and people like me who had made every major life decision since turning 22 based on where I could get health insurance (hello preexisting conditions) breathed a deep sigh of relief, wept one tear, and took a long nap.Fast-forward to now and the part of the decision that made it optional for states to decline to expand their Medicaid programs is taking it's toll. In states where Medicaid was not expanded, the majority of adults making under 100% of the federal poverty level have no options for health insurance. They do not qualify for the incentives available through health insurance exchanges. They cannot afford private coverage. Unethical.Just for fun, here's the states by political party in 2013 (source):Uninsured people will still use emergency departments and be inpatients, putting hospitals in a tough position as part of the ACA takes away the pre-ACA measure of DSH (disproportionate share hospital) funding (federal dollars) that hospitals needed to account for the absence of reimbursement from these uninsured folks. DSH dollars were supposed to be replaced by payments from Medicaid insurance dollars. In states that did not expand Medicaid, DSH dollars are being replaced by zero dollars. IMHO this is on the state--but Obamacare takes the knock. From the patients denied access to affordable care, the hospitals that are in dire straights financially, and the communities that are losing their hospitals (and often largest employers) as they just can't stay afloat.I'm working up posts describing how one qualifies for Medicaid in non-expanded states, the state incentives offered by Medicaid expansion, and the burden on local communities with large numbers of uninsured people in poverty. This is a mire, but I can't think of one more worthwhile to wade through. PARTY TIME!