What happens when a cost currently borne by the states is shifted to the federal government? State politicians treat it as “free money”, but it certainly is not. The cost must be paid by some means. It may be paid by higher taxes, by debt (future taxes), or by printing money (a hidden tax paid through the devaluation of the currency). If the feds can perform whatever function is involved more efficiently than the states (national defense for example), the shift makes sense. However, it is rarely the case that the feds do something more efficiently than the states, so the transfer is almost always harmful in total. Because the costs and the benefits of such programs are not distributed via the same mechanism, individual states may gain (get disproportional benefit) and others may lose. State politicians may do the calculation and conclude that they will be winners, but that is only true to the extent that someone else is harmed. Generally, politically powerful states benefit, while less powerful states suffer. Anyone who thinks that Arkansas is a favored state, especially with a Democrat in the White House, is foolish.

Obamacare is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and that manbearpig named Elana kagan should have recused herself b/c she prepped the legal defense for obamacare..

If we are not going to be taxed at the state level for this, we are going to be taxed at the federal level. Just so Obama's unemployed and his illegal aliens can get free medical. There is not a win win here at all, especially for the tax payer. I'm sick and tired of paying 40% of my income for taxes that go towards giving those without a job and not willing to get a job a free ride.

less see here...add people...don't add any money...and we'll have more money...hmmm those special magic democrat numbers again