Quote
Congress does not engender trust, and does not deserve our trust.

So I guess you were perfectly fine with RomneyCare: The Massachusetts health insurance plan ACA was based on. (The main difference was that the RomneyCare mandate penalty was much higher than ACA's.) That was run entirely by the state for the people of that state.

Just like each other state's version of ACA. I think there is a little hole in your logic here!

I also think you don't have any problem with ACA redefining insurance to cover preexisting conditions, having no exclusions, no yearly or lifetime cap, etc. I bet your main objection is that the federal government gives poor people subsidies. Which means poor people should just die. Which won't really happen because they will just use very expensive ER visits to get health care and all the hospitals will have to eat it and go bankrupt, or charge everybody with insurance enough to make up for it.

This says a lot more about you and your sense of right and wrong than it does about the ACA. Poor people end up with health care either way, but as long as they don't have insurance it is better even if we all end up paying more.