Opposition to Obamacare has all but evaporated, perhaps the most striking public opinion turn-around in recent memory. Some columnists say, "It's hard to refuse a hand-out" but their cynicism belies the fact that most of those polled receive no direct benefit from Obamacare. Indeed, they are paying for it! So, the real question is why those who are financially disadvantaged by Obamacare are suddenly opposing its repeal.

 

Here are some plausible explanations. First, the Republicans can no longer characterize Medicaid expansion as "welfare" because most of the households have at least one working member, especially as unemployment declines. Thus, the notion that states could/should require Medicaid expansion recipients to work has failed to gain traction. Most already do. Second, unlike other federally funded/state administered programs such as Food Stamps (SNAP: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) where it is facile to parse the populace into "us and them," Obamacare beneficiaries are much closer to "us." Not only do recipients work, they install our replacement windows, remodel our kitchens, operate road-side stands, replace our leaky hot water heaters and, in general, work for firms and businesses that are too small to be covered by the employer mandate. The line between "us and them" has thus been blurred for the better. Many of us are reminded of growing up in working households where money was tight. There was no meat on Friday but there was no money to buy meat anyway. Third, those who obtain their insurance through the exchanges have "skin in the game" because their subsidy is inversely proportional to their income. Those who bristled at the individual mandate now see it more like a Pell Grant, a hugely successful needs-based subsidy program that has allowed millions to obtain a college education with federal dollars.