Would it surprise anyone to know that despite Michigan Live reporting that the state of Michigan is receiving $80 million dollars under the Affordable Care Act that the state of California receives the most federal funding dollars ($1.143 million)?
And would it also surprise Americans to know that the District of Columbia only gets $155 million of the billions being spent--but is the top contender when it comes to per capita dollars received?
Based upon the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation's report, this year the breakdown of federal tax dollars being spent per state to ready them for the ACA, which went into law in 2010--and was hotly contested thereafter, appears disproportionate. Some states appear to be getting the shaft while others seem to be hooked up to a gravy train.
The west coast state of California does boast one of the largest geographical-sized states in the country, and has a population base to go with it. So it seems only fair they would get a larger cut of the federal ACA pie.
However, when one looks at the per capita spending going on per state California ranks much lower than D.C., with only $30.96 per person being allocated for spending. D.C., on the other hand, is spending an average of $257.39 per person, even though D.C. is much smaller in size and population than California.
The Kaiser Family Foundation thinks that may be due to the fact that many national organizations are headquartered in D.C., enabling them to access funding more easily from the ACA purse string holders.
But is that a fair and equitable way to divide up taxpayer dollars for those needing "affordable care?"
The state of Michigan is receiving their $80 million in order to improve access to health care for their state citizens, just like the rest of the country, but they can also boast being one of three states to receive the largest portion of the funds.
In fact, Michigan is receiving a total take of $815 million altogether according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
The two states receiving the least amount of federal funding dollars are North Dakota and Wyoming, which each receive a mere total of $22 million.
Federal funding dollars being allocated to pay for the implementation of the Affordable Care Act isn't just being spent on taking care of the poor in the country's midst, as some might believe. The money is being spent on training new nurses, doctors and others in advance of an anticipated medical growth need.
But should tax payers be asked to pay for educating those who will later earn high salaries for the jobs they perform?
Surprisingly, the majority of taxpayer monies will go to provide 10 states with the bulk of the financial largess collected from taxpayers. Those 10 states are California, New York, Michigan, Texas, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Oregon.
And in Illinois, former home to President Obama, 85 percent of the $525 million funding received by the state from the Affordable Care Act is going to private entities to distribute and use, rather than local or state officials. So the potential for abuse without oversight is magnified.