[sickoflibs]

RE :”Not only could some states opt out of increasing the number of adults in the government health insurance program for the poor as a result of the Supreme Court's ruling, but they also could cut people now enrolled.
This wasn't supposed to happen under President Barack Obama’s health law designed to expand coverage for 30 million Americans, in part by adding 17 million people to Medicaid.
But the impact of the high court's ruling making the expansion voluntary is likely to be compounded by another provision in the law that the justices left intact: In 2014, states are no longer barred from making it harder for adults to qualify for Medicaid.
Experts worry those two developments taken together could spur some states to reduce the number of people covered.
States could throw some low-income adults “into a black hole with nowhere to turn for coverage,” said Deborah Bachrach, who was New York's Medicaid director until 2010 and now is special counsel at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, a New York law firm.”

Looks like Roberts knew what he was doing.
With all the liberal patting Obama on the back over this huge 'victory' (to get him re-elected) and the Republican whining on the other side over'losing' , this part of the SCOTUS ruling was ignored.

Huge Obama victory, libs cheer! OH-OH, where did this come from? This reminds me of when Boehner said he got 95% of what he wanted in a bill the same house members want to repeal.

Solution?? repeal Obama-care.

[GOPJ]

Companies will drop health insurance like they dropped pensions when 401K’s came along... We’re creating the darkness...

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Looks like Roberts knew what he was doing.

That statement could be interpreted to mean "what he was doing" was to destroy federalism, but assume you meant he was trying to create a poison pill for Obamacare. Whatever his motives, I am not convinced this is a good thing. Time will tell.

With all the liberal patting Obama on the back over this huge 'victory' (to get him re-elected) and the Republican whining on the other side over'losing' , this part of the SCOTUS ruling was ignored.

Some on FR have not discussed it, but in general it was hardly ignored.

Suppose that several states refuse the Obamacare expansions.

1) Dems are ready to demagogue governors and state legislatures who do not embrace the expansion. That could make a bigger difference in the 2014 elections than 2012.

2) Blue states are going to take all the fed money, and we all have to pay for that eventually. What happens if a blue state goes bankrupt because of its eventual "required contributions?" Bailout?

3) Don't the illegals, etc., go to federally-propped-up exchanges? Don't we get bigger government, more pork, more debt?

If Obamacare folds because of the Roberts ruling, the consensus will be that he is a genius, a long term thinker. Otherwise, many will blame Roberts, even if the GOP could have used the ruling to destroy Obamacare, (although I believe that would be much easier said than done -- perhaps beyond the capability/determination of GOP politicians).

Again, time will tell.