Jessica Schubel

Mr. Sandoval vetoed the Medicaid-available-for-all bill on Friday night, hours before the deadline, saying that the legislation “could introduce more uncertainty to an already fragile health-care market and ultimately affect patient health care” and that it was being rushed “without factual foundation or adequate understanding of the possible consequences.”

But supporters of Medicaid access-for-all, including the bill’s sponsor, Assemblyman Mike Sprinkle, have argued that  it  cost less than a single-payer plan and that it was needed because “There is an absolute need for states to become more reliant on providing insurance options to its citizens.”

“It’s an innovative approach that might also be of interest to other states,” says Jessica Schubel, senior policy analyst with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told Governing magazine. “but it clearly rests on the base of a strong Medicaid program and robust marketplace subsidies — both of which are in danger.”

The state is pushing hard to shore up its health-insurance offerings. For instance, Governing reports, it has told private insurers   that their “applications for state Medicaid contracts would get preferential treatment if they also sold plans on the marketplace  — and it’s already paying off.

“Nevada is the only state where Aetna is still going to offer coverage in 2018. This fall, Nevadans shopping on the exchanges will have five insurance options. In addition, premiums are expected to be lower than the national average.”