I’ll let Josh Barro’s Twitter thread here shed some light on this. I recommend you all read the entire thing — including all of the responses to him.
So, this is odd: as @RAVerBruggen discovers, Cassidy-Graham spending projections reflect a large bonus for Alaska.
https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/910337112549072896
In 2026, every state would get almost exactly $4,400 per eligible person, except Alaska, which would get $6,500.
https://www.cassidy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson%20Model_9-12-17.pdf …
https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/910337318896193536
However, I am unable to find a provision described in the section-by-section summary that would create such a bonus.
https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/910337471707336704
Despite this bonus, Alaska still would get less in 2026 with G-C than under current law, because healthcare in Alaska is very expensive.
https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/910337696350048256
But it would mean Alaska gets fairly mild cuts instead of extremely deep ones -- for obvious political reasons.
https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/910337808312741889
Hmm…..why Alaska? I can’t think of any reason for why this may be the case….*rolls eyes*