The Affordable Care Act has allowed for more workers to be covered by the law’s protections for workers in the private sector.
Many companies have started offering health benefits to their workers through these arrangements, but many employers are still paying workers less than the federal minimum wage.
Many also have a cap on their employees’ pay that some workers will need to exceed.
But the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the number of workers covered by federal protections has actually declined since the ACA was enacted.
A study published Wednesday in the Journal of Health Economics suggests that employers are paying less for care workers to make up for the higher costs of the ACA.
This is likely because of the economic recession that has hit the country’s most populous states.
As a result, workers in those states have seen their wages stagnate or decline.
But there’s a catch: Some of those workers may not have been covered by Obamacare in the first place.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) analyzed data from 586,000 private sector workers in 2015.
The researchers found that while employers in states that expanded their Medicaid programs to cover more workers under the ACA had a higher median annual wage, they also had fewer workers covered through the expanded Medicaid programs.
The study’s authors wrote that the decline in workers covered under the expansions was driven by two factors: 1) the higher number of people covered in the Medicaid expansion compared to the number in the workforce at the time the workers were surveyed, and 2) higher cost of care for workers.
The authors found that workers in states with the expansion had a median annual income of $32,904, but the median wage for all workers was $20,000.
While that’s still more than the $21,000 the median workers of those states earned in 2015, it’s still lower than the median wages for workers across the country.
The analysis also found that in states where workers were not covered under Medicaid expansion, the median annual wages were higher, and those workers had higher levels of household debt.
This suggests that higher cost is being passed on to workers.
If the number for the workers surveyed were smaller, there might be less people covered.
But if the number were larger, there could be more workers covered, which would increase the overall cost of the health insurance coverage for the employees.
It also shows that many of those covered workers are workers in low-wage jobs.
This means that the higher pay may not be as high for those workers, since they would be paid more.
However, the researchers found some benefits to having workers covered in Medicaid expansions.
They found that the health care costs paid by Medicaid expansion participants were lower, which may be due to workers receiving a lower percentage of their wages through the expansion than workers in other sectors.
For instance, health care workers in blue collar occupations were more likely to have access to health care.
The BEA also found evidence that states with Medicaid expansions had lower unemployment rates and higher wages than states without them.
And it found that states that had Medicaid expansions experienced higher rates of people reporting that they were underemployed, which suggests that workers with lower wages and fewer jobs were able to stay in their jobs.
A separate analysis published Wednesday by the University of Michigan School of Public Health found that Medicaid expansions actually reduced the number and severity of hospitalizations and emergency department visits among Medicaid enrollees.
While this study is limited by the limited data, the authors found a positive relationship between Medicaid expansion and hospitalization rates and emergency room visits.
They also found a decrease in the number, severity and duration of hospitalization for Medicaid enrollee patients.
This could be due in part to lower hospitalizations due to the ACA’s expansion of Medicaid coverage to more low-income workers.
This also could be because the number who received Medicaid expanded coverage actually decreased.
But, overall, this analysis does not suggest that the expansion of the law has led to a decline in hospitalization or other health care-related health care use among people who did not receive it.
The other factor that the BEA study noted is that workers who did receive health insurance benefits did so at higher levels than those who did Not have Medicaid expansions, the study found.
This study is important for understanding why employers are more willing to pay less for their workers than they were before the ACA, because it may help explain why more workers are getting less health care coverage.
The Affordable Healthcare Act is not without its critics, though.
Some have argued that it has made employers more reluctant to hire people who may be unable to pay their bills or may not meet certain employment standards, such as having at least a bachelor’s degree.
The new data from BEA suggest that this is a problem.
Workers are not only paying less, but they’re also not getting as much as they were previously.
This can cause employers to be less willing to offer their workers a job in the future, because they know that they may not get a job that pays their bills. This