Christopher, if the state begins a program, but then runs out of money to fund it, the political…
David Cearley

You inadvertently owned up to it in the first sentence—something that I’ve heard from a lot Republicans in private, too. The fear is that additional heath care for the poor will work and be popular, and that Republicans will pay a price for revoking it later if they want to, because revoking it will harm a lot of people.

That makes a certain amount of political sense, but I think you owe it to everybody else to be honest about your moral calculus. If it’s not very important to you that poor people be able to go to a doctor—if knowing that a poor person with cancer can get minimal treatment, instead of quietly dying, is a secondary consideration to your party’s political situation—just own up to that. Be truthful.

Won’t be responding anymore — have a good night.