A-score 20.83: Resource reallocation mechanism present (+1.25 modifier) but single-state scope reduces impact (0.85 modifier). Separation of powers (4) reflects federal-state tension over funding authority. Rule of law (3) and civil rights (3) reflect potential impact on healthcare access but lack clear constitutional violation. Election impact (2) minimal without direct electoral interference. Precedent severity (1.2) acknowledges potential for similar state targeting. B-score 24.09: High media friendliness (8) and outrage potential (7) in healthcare context. Layer 2 shows pattern matching (7) with administration's state-level conflicts and mismatch (6) between funding block and health needs. Intentionality (8) suggests strategic targeting but not definitive. D-score: -3.26 (slight B>A). Both scores below 25 threshold. Classification: Noise - appears to be routine federal-state funding dispute lacking clear constitutional mechanism or extraordinary hype. May represent legitimate administrative action or policy disagreement rather than constitutional damage. Requires additional context on legal basis for block.