If you read my replies to other threads in this discussion, you might imagine I agree with the pessimistic tone of the article. But change is hard. We have no rational basis to imagine that such a momentous policy (and enforcement) upheaval would not make things somewhat "worse" before they might become better. Or, whether the troubling anecdotes observed now under the new policy are truly statistically significant compared to the proportion of those benefitted by the change -- until a more thoughrough assessment can be conducted.

If people are hoping for a policy where literally no one "falls through the cracks", I'd have to suspect they had little to no experience with those who struggle with substance addiction.