Ever since its controversial passage in 2010, the Affordable Care Act has been plastered with a range of polemic labels. Critics say Obamacare is job-killing; supporters herald it as life-saving.
Here’s another, perhaps unexpected label: personally profitable.
If you were among the true believers in the law a year ago today, there was easy money to be made. Nearly 80% of bettors on InTrade expected the law to be found unconstitutional; strategically spending about $25 in favor of the ACA could’ve netted you $800, based on how InTrade’s short-selling rules worked.
Much has changed, certainly, since Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote to uphold the law. (Beyond those bettors’ account balances, and the existence of InTrade itself, which mysteriously shut down in March.)
Here’s a look at how the Supreme Court’s decision on June 28, 2012, affected five hot-button issues related to the health law.
States’ decisions on Medicaid expansion
As of June 27, 2012: Several states with progressive governors and legislatures, like California, had moved to expand Medicaid ahead of the Supreme Court’s ruling. The Golden State’s leaders also had pledged to pursue universal coverage if the ACA was ruled unconstitutional.
But most states were waiting on the resolution of the constitutionality battle.
Since June 28, 2012: After the Court’s decision that the mandate was constitutional but that the Medicaid expansion was optional for states — which “took everyone by surprise,” said Matt Salo, executive director of the National Association of Medical Directors — governors were suddenly forced to decide whether the expansion made financial, and political, sense. Within a week, about ten states had signaled they’d expand Medicaid under the ACA.
However, many wary governors chose to wait for the November elections, and the knowledge of who would hold the White House, before announcing their plans; following President Obama’s reelection, a flurry of governors clarified their Medicaid stances throughout the winter and spring.