Which states will benefit the most from Obamacare?

Published: Monday, Nov. 18 2013 4:18 p.m. MST

Wallet Hub released a study showing the impact of the Affordable Care Act in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Its conclusion? Blue states are getting a better deal than red states, seeing significant gains in certain areas of health care. But if red states were to all opt into the Medicaid expansion (currently 26 states have not expanded Medicaid), Wallet Hub says that rankings would change drastically.

Other findings in the study say that for the most part expanding Medicaid gives states more positives than negatives, with states that opt to expand their programs looking at "significant return on investment."

But the expansion of Medicaid didn't exactly match up with reductions in uninsured. "While one might assume that all of the states opting for ACA-advised Medicaid expansion would see larger reductions in their uninsured population than states opting out, that isn’t necessarily the case. Rather, the change in a state’s uninsured population depends on its Medicaid requirements prior to the ACA’s expansion as well as its decision to opt in or out of federally advised expansion. That is why states like Rhode Island, Nevada, California, New Mexico and Arkansas will see their per capita uninsured populations decline the most, while Pennsylvania, Maine, Iowa, Wisconsin and Massachusetts will still see declines, but they will be less significant."

Small-business owners were found to benefit across all states. "The ACA provides tax credits to small businesses with fewer than 25 employees who make less than $50,000 per year on average. Based on analysis of Census payroll records, the average company of that size in every state would qualify for the tax credit."

The 11 aspects the study looked at are: Preexisting conditions per capita, savings per capita on out-of-pocket medical expenses, average change in premium, tax credit-eligible small businesses per capita, changes in per capita uninsured population, emergency room visits per capita, average savings on uncompensated care spending per capita, cost benefit of Medicaid expansion, state spending required for federal funding, access to care and preliminary applications.

Utah ranks among the lowest when it comes to benefits. In fact, Utah is ranked 50th out of 51, with only Georgia performing worse than Utah. However if Utah were to opt into the Medicaid expansion, then it would rank 42nd.

This list ranks each state from those that benefit the most (1 being greatest) to the lowest benefiting state (51). For the full analysis of the ACA's impact on the states, you can view the study on Wallet Hub.

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

which states?? Well let's see.... probably those that have the most "free loaders" who will get free health care or perhaps the BIG union states since Barack is going to try to exempt his union bosses like he did congress and his favorite corporate supporters....

ConservativeCommonTater
West Valley City, UT

there is a Wal-Mart advertisement on TV in which the characters/employees claim that so many people have been promoted, people get benefits, they started as a something or other and are now in management, etc.

The one claim they made is that they "get healthcare insurance for $40.00 a month."

What they don't say is that Wal-Mart coaches them on how to get that $40.00 a month healthcare plan or how to apply for food stamps and other "benefits" is because they are paid so little they qualify for these "benefits."

The $40.00 a month healthcare is not provided by Wal-Mart, it is one of the subsidized healthcare plans they qualify for under "Obamacare."

Republicans bemoan Obamacare as "wealth redistribution" but they don't think that subsidizing the benefits of the largest employer in the U.S. is a form of welfare or redistribution of wealth, OURS!

tesuji
Bountiful, UT

I think we should give Obamacare a chance. Many people have no insurance - not all these people are freeloaders. It's hard to afford, and hard to get if you have pre-existing conditions.

Others of us have health insurance through our employers, but not great insurance. My employer charges me $600 per month for my coverage, and it has $3000 annual deductible. So it's basically catastrophic care for $600 a month.

It will only get worse, as costs rise and we all pay more for "employer provided" insurance, as employers continue to pass the cost onto employees.

The point of Obamacare is to get people insured and out of the ER. In the end, the ER costs all of us tons of money - it's the worst method to get care.

Plus, it's a market-based approach. Insurance companies compete.

Shawnm750
West Jordan, UT

@tesuji - "The point of Obamacare is to get people insured and out of the ER. In the end, the ER costs all of us tons of money - it's the worst method to get care."

That may be A point of the bill, but that's not what is going to happen. Because most doctors already have more patients than they have time to actually see, there's still going to be a large group of people that end up at the ER for basic care. The number of Family Medicine practitioners is steadily decreasing because there's little money to be made. More med-school students are opting to become specialists because the compensation is better. Plus, many doctors don't accept medicare/medicaid because the government is already so lousy about paying claims. Not all of people now eligible for coverage under Obamacare will be covered through Medicare/Medicaid, but the majority will. So really, those consistently going to the ER now will still be going to the ER, but instead of hospitals having to try and get money from them, they'll be going to the government for payment...and just how long do you think that's going work? O_o

Billy Bob
Salt Lake City, UT

The title of this article (and the study cited within) should be "Which States will be hurt the least by Obamacare". Let's not kid ourselves. Obamacare is not going to benefit any states.

Sophie 62
spring city, UT

Even as a person who works hard every day, I still have not been able to afford health insurance for 30 years. Going to the ER is not a viable option for me because it costs easily twice as much as going to the regular doctor and I still have to pay for all of it.
With the ACA, I will finally be able to afford to buy insurance and they can't turn me down for preexisting conditions.
The Republican rhetoric that makes people so mad about this new law is that it's all about giving healthcare benefits to a bunch of freeloaders. You know what? There probably are a relatively small percentage of real honest to goodness freeloaders, compared to the number of hard-working but poor or less-well-off or even average citizens who will benefit from this law.
They want to scare you and make you mad, and they're doing a good job of it.
The truth is that most of the people who will benefit the most from the ACA work as hard or harder than you do, and always have and will continue to.

Gene Poole
SLC, UT

Simple question: How many people for or against the ObamaCare health program (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) have actually read the entire bill. Probably as many as the representatives in Congress that did. 906 pages. Have you read it?

I guess before any criticism or laudatory comments are made, you may want to read what you are castigating or praising. Just a thought.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments