Report: State decisions determine how residents fare under Obamacare

The report by a Yale University economist found it difficult to generalize about the health law's impact because it varies greatly state by state.

The Washington Post's Wonkblog: Measuring The Impact Of States' Obamacare Decisions
The early story of the Affordable Care Act can be challenging to generalize sometimes because so much of it depends on decisions made at the state level -; both before and during implementation of the ACA. Did states defer to a federal-run exchange, or did they set up their own? In the states that built their own insurance marketplaces, did the Web site actually work? Did they expand Medicaid programs to low-income adults? Did they temporarily let people keep their old health plans? (Millman, 9/11).

The Wall Street Journal's Real Time Economics: Obamacare Participants Worse Off, But Don't Blame Washington -; Blame States, Paper Says
The president's health-care law has made participants in most states worse off, but the result may reflect decisions made in state capitals, not the broader policy, a new study from a Yale University economist found. The average enrollee in a health plan made available under the Affordable Care Act saw individual welfare decline in 35 states, according to the study Amanda Kowalski presented Thursday at the Brookings Institution in Washington. The report found the majority of those states either handed over at least part of the rollout to the federal government or were crippled by technology glitches (Morath, 9/11).