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.
Aridog:
It is my understanding that there are two non-Democrat objections to Holder’s replacement:
1) There hasn’t been an AG appointment during the last couple of months of a lame duck Congress in over a hundred years. Clearly, the public voted for a new direction, so they’re squeezing as much in as possible. Unfortunately, this is their legal right.
2) There is a concern that we will be scorched with the same sort of ideology as Eric Holder, with whom she is very close. Although she can refuse to answer their questions on how she would have acted in similar situations, if she does so, it will sound like an affirmation, which will be on record and display to the American people.
They can’t block her, but they can probe her ideology while on the record.
I don’t get the impression that Gruber is “coming clean” or doing a mea culpa.
It seems more like gleeful narcissism, and doing a victory dance about pulling the wool over the eyes of naive voters. He probably thought he accomplished the impossible, fooling Americans as he did.
Sounds like gloating, to me.
Karen – I have to agree. Gruber is patting his own back about what a good boy he is. He is just too proud of his work not brag about it.
Voters are so eager to pass taxes on other people, while ignorant of the fact that those taxes inevitably affect all of us. Tax businesses, and they will either lay off workers or raise prices on all of us.
That is why it becomes unfair and undemocratic for us to keep voting on taxes for “other people” because voters will almost always vote for higher taxes on a minority, but rarely vote for taxes that affect them. The minority is helpless to prevent it, whether that minority is small business owners, the rich, or the manufacturers of luxury products.
And I particularly like how Gruber gleefully explained how he got the health insurance tax through by claiming that it was only a tax on the insurance companies . . . who turn right around and pass that added cost on to their customers. Obviously. That’s what any business does.
I wonder if Gruber chortles every night about moron voters.
Trooperyork, you have had a comment deleted under our civility rule.
Anyone who would vote for “you’ve got to pass it to know what’s in it” lying Pelosi inflicts their own foolishness on the rest of us.
Oh, look, their reaction to someone telling the truth about their misdeeds is to lie.
Those that have claimed they don’t know him have been caught on video speaking about him. He’s been to meetings chaired by Obama. Claimed he had nothing to do with the writing of the bill when he was paid almost half a million dollars to do just that.
More despicable lies. If we continue to accept this behavior, then we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Gruber is on record saying Obamacare was never meant to save anyone money. But Obama claimed America families would save $2500. Gruber explained that if American voters realized that they would be charged more for health care to provide it to the poor, no one would vote for it. So they lied. He said it was really a tax, which is illegal, in how it neither originated as a tax nor was voted on as a tax. In fact, Obama is on record denying it was a tax.
At least Gruber is, belatedly, telling the truth.
I wonder how his supporters feel, hearing undeniable proof that Obama et all thinks they’re stupid and easily led.
Clinton is a rat. They are all rats.
There is plenty of Republican support for the TPP also btw.
Both parties are traitors
Squeeky, nicely stated. 🙂
I am doing some research and need to know what “a Koolaid swilling, goosestepping commie” is? A reference to Putin? What is Koolaid? Aid to cold countries above the arctic circle? If you have Communists in this country why do they not speak up for things like equal pay and all that? I went back to visit Ferguson for two days last week. Went to some good bars in St. Louis City nearby. Someone wants to run Michael Brown’s mother for a seat in Congress. She said she is no longer fertile, that she cant have a welfare kid and “she needs a check”. Ferguson is a good place here on Planet Earth. Go visit after the turmoil is over.
People like Gruber are why people like me are Global Warming skeptics. The whole “expert” thing has been way overdone, and adding millionish dollar grants to the mix proves that some people will say anything to keep the money coming.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
QChipS
That’s what “socks” are for. . .to cover defeat.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
The thought: “Better to disavow him now before others investigate me further” is probably running through many minds on the beltway.
If there were a value-added tax on internet commentary, Annie, you’d never owe a cent.
I would venture a guess that Anon loves Hillary.
So Anon, you like PUMAs do you? What do you think of Hillary running again?
SWM, yep. It’s one ‘scandal’ to the next.