It appears that friends (albeit a dwindling number) of MIT professor Jonathan Gruber may soon have to put his face on milk cartons to locate the economist. After a series of frank but embarrassing statements on the strategies behind the Administration’s passage of the Affordable Car Act (ACA), Gruber has moved from the status of “disfavored” to “disavowed” to “disappeared.” This week, Democratic minority leader Nancy Pelosi expressed a complete lack of knowledge of who Gruber is, was, or will be — even though she previously cited his work and he was paid $400,000 as one of the architects of Obamacare and has made over $2 million from HHS. Such roles are often difficult for scholars in moving between the political and academic worlds, but it is rare to find an academic become such an issue in a national debate.
Gruber had already previously attracted controversy with statements where he endorsed the theory at the heart of the recent decisions in Halbig and King by challengers to the ACA: to wit, that the federal funding provision was a quid pro quo device to reward states with their own exchanges and to punish those that force the creation of federal exchanges. That issue will now be decided by the United States Supreme Court. Gruber caused uproar when, after he had denounced the theory as “nutty” during the arguments in Halbig and King, he was shown later to have embraced that same interpretation. Gruber has become a major liability in the litigation. Gruber then was back in the news with an equally startling admission that the Obama Administration (and Gruber) succeeded in passing the ACA only by engineering a “lack of transparency” on the details and relying on “the stupidity of the American voter.” Now a new videotape has surfaced from Gruber speaking at the University of Rhode Island in 2012 and expressing the same contempt for the intelligence of citizens — suggesting again that they were hoodwinked to “the lack of economic understanding of the American voter.” In another view taken from at an October 2013 event at Washington University in St. Louis, Gruber also refers to the “Cadillac tax,” and says “They proposed it and that passed, because the American people are too stupid to understand the difference.” His comments of working in Massachusetts (with Mitt Romney) are no less insulting to an array of people.
That is when the Beltway machine kicked into high gear to erase all memory of a professor named Gruber. If this trend continues, we will need dental records just to confirm his identity.
The Washington Post noted after Pelosi’s press conference that she cited Gruber’s work by name in support of Obamacare:
PELOSI: We’re not finished getting all of our reports back from CBO, but we’ll have a side by side to compare. But our bill brings down rates. I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT’s analysis of what the comparison is to the status quo versus what will happen in our bill for those who seek insurance within the exchange.
Her office also relied on Gruber when fighting to pass the law.
Before he was “disappeared,” he was widely cited as an architect of the act. The New York Times said in 2012:
After Mr. Gruber helped the administration put together the basic principles of the proposal, the White House lent him to Capitol Hill to help Congressional staff members draft the specifics of the legislation.
Nevertheless, the White House used an anonymous official to disavow Gruber’s role as an architect of the Act and insist that he never “worked in the White House” — a comment that may refer to the location of his actual desk.
He was widely sought as one of the architect of the law, which ultimately proved his undoing since many of these comments came in the same 2012-13 period. Supporters of the White House have even challenged the $400,000 figure paid out for Gruber. However, the Washington Post not only affirmed the figure used by Republicans but found that he had received $2 million on various contracts. Pretty good for a guy who must not now be named.
The tempest swirling around Gruber is difficult to watch. He is an accomplished scholar with a long list of accomplishments to his credit. The frankness with which he has spoken is a signature of an academic, though his view of the intelligence of the American people is quite shocking. It will remain a cautionary tale for those traveling between the academic and political worlds.
Proof the Obama Administration really does believe his supporters are grubered:
“Transparency is a key goal of the ACA: consumers now have more access to information about their health insurance than ever before,” White House spokesperson Jessica Santillo said in a statement to TPM. “The Affordable Care Act was publicly debated over the course of 14 months, with dozens of Congressional hearings, and countless town halls, speeches, and debates.
“The tax credits in the law that help millions of middle class Americans afford coverage were no secret, and in fact were central to the legislation,” she continued. “Not only do we disagree with those comments, they’re simply not true.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/white-house-gruber-comments-simple-not-true
Any comment adding a Jonah Goldberg A-#1? If Hillary says “health care” she’s a goner. If impeached, Obama might resign rather than have all the dirty linen aired. Michele wouldn’t want that.
Yes. This should be the next step, (may not be the last step) . I believe if this step is implemented correctly the last step(impeachment) may not even be needed to restore the balance of power.
xyz,
I do agree; it’s like NOT telling your enemy (ISIS) the things you won’t do, like no combat troops being deployed.
Olly,
I am saying something different actually. Make it overt, that you believe that the right consequence is impeachment, but if that happens everyone who votes for that will be called a racist, the mainstream media will equate republican party with al qaida, people will say things like what other president has been treated like this , and all that will not be good for the country, so you will instead try other remedies to keep the balance of power that founders wanted. This may be the best way to improve things with least amount of negative side effects.
swarthmoremom,
I believe they will attempt to do many things that the people want and time will tell if the President decides to honor that will.
Oily, Why don’t they just govern and pass a fix to the ACA, an immigration law, and tax reform. No democrats and many many republicans in the Senate will not vote for impeachment… waste of time. Oh well, the talk keeps the teapartyers hopes up.
I agree with you SMM, they should focus on making the case to get the 2/3’s necessary. They have sufficient cause for impeachment and should be able to find enough of them not yet completely grubered to get the necessary majority.
A decision has been not to impeach because they don’t have the two thirds majority in order to do so. Why waste the time and money when they can revert to plan B and shut the government down again.
xyz,
So try the case in the court of public opinion and not in the Senate?
Olly, if a decision has been made not to impeach, because of the way MSM is going to portray it, or how a certain portion of the electorate will react , or how Messy it can get (as Darren and JT have implied), then it may not be a bad idea, still, for republicans to discuss those reasons openly, rather than just saying impeachment is not an option. Remove the cover, and expose the game that is being played by the administration.
Reblogged this on This Got My Attention and commented:
Gruber’s lack of integrity only increases the problems decent experts have contributing to public policy. He definitely deserves to be sent to a corner with a big dunce cap on his head.
Haz, The left are incredibly Orwellian.
Observer, Atkisson has proof this Administration has an enemies list just like their Republican predecessor, Nixon. Her book is on my short list. I’ve seen her interviewed several times. She even predicted in the book how the Obama cultists would try and slime her.
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented worker is like calling a looter an unfounded shopper.
Or to put it another way
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X529pt-OlbM&w=560&h=315%5D
Fish gotta swim……birds gotta fly