MIT professor Jonathan Gruber has produced a firestorm of controversy over remarks made in various settings about the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) and how drafters like himself relied on the “stupidity” of voters in passing the legislation. It appears that the Gruber hits keep coming, even as he prepares for another round of questioning in Congress. The latest comments from 2009 reveal Gruber saying that Obamacare would not produce affordable health care for many citizens since its focus is coverage not costs. This statement made five months before the passage of the Act from a key architect is in stark contrast to President Obama’s repeated assertions that premiums would go down dramatically. The latest statement will fuel questioning before Congress on whether the White House knew that premiums were unlikely to do down and that people would not be able to keep their current policies as promised by President Obama in selling the program.
Gruber stated in 2009 that Obamacare lacked cost controls in it and would not be affordable for many:
“The problem is it starts to go hand in hand with the mandate; you can’t mandate insurance that’s not affordable. This is going to be a major issue . . . So what’s different this time? Why are we closer than we’ve ever been before? Because there are no cost controls in these proposals. Because this bill’s about coverage. Which is good! Why should we hold 48 million uninsured people hostage to the fact that we don’t yet know how to control costs in a politically acceptable way? Let’s get the people covered and then let’s do cost control.”
That view of the likely impact of the ACA was not only never shared by the Administration, it is in direct contradiction with the statements made by the White House on how costs would decline and people would be able to keep their policies if they liked them.
The latest comments are unlikely to gain Gruber any more allies. Once given millions to advise the federal and state governments on their health care system, he is now persona non grata. Indeed, 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.
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.
The latest statement is also likely to serve to increase calls for Gruber and the Administration to produce withheld documents previously demanded by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. This statement is far more important than past comments calling voters or politicians stupid. In 2009, Gruber was saying that the ACA was not about reducing costs but guaranteeing coverage. That seems manifestly true but it was not what the White House was saying at the time or even now. The statements are likely to draw more fire with fines set to increase under Obamacare in 2015.
The statement was again in a lecture by Gruber. Once again, Gruber was displaying the type of honesty and openness that students expect in classroom discussions. That is not the expectation however in political discussions, particularly in Washington. Gruber’s admissions have embarrassed the White House and Democratic leaders who pushed through the ACA on a razor thin vote. This is why academics often find work in politics to be particularly precarious. The nature of our work demands intellectual honestly and transparency that can be a liability in the political world. Indeed, conservative editorial are already proclaiming that “Grubergate” just got “better” .
The cancellation of state contracts is likely to be the least of Gruber’s problems in 2015 as he appears again before Congress.
I am a Liberal Dog. Blame me for the mess that we are in with our medical UnSystem. It has no rhyme or reason other than to enrich a few. It is not intended to impoverish all of you but the only intent at play is the intent to get rich quick at the expense of Dog Knows Who and who cares. Until the people decide that they as a whole need to impose a system of medical care which is not in existence to enrich a few, there will be no solution. I don’t know which country in the world has a fine example to emulate. The Canadians who live down here in America will often say that their system back home sucks. One word enters the fray which we must seek to implement: Affordable.
“I have a healthy skepticism about all media from L, R, and center perspectives. ”
Well God bless you for that.
“I can’t say with 100% certainty that all procedures at OK Surgery Center require follow-up care”
All surgery requires follow up care. There’s one appt the day after, at the very least. Usually, there’s another a week out and then another a month after. So, after you have the surgery, you have to find a specialist in your area that can take over your care. If you consider all costs, the healthcare model proposed in that article is more expensive than is currently available and is only available to those that can afford tens of thousands in sudden expenditures. It’s a completely cruel and inhumane system that would be far worse than anything we do or have had.
“This center is one example of an attempt to let the market determine the health care costs.”
There’s no such thing as a “free market”. JD Rockefeller once said- “Competition is a sin”, and that’s a maxim every company in every industry follows. As soon as they are large enough to begin lobbying for legislation to tilt the market in their favor, that’s exactly what they do. Now, thanks to recent (conservative)supreme court rulings, they can legally bribe politicians as long as it isn’t quid pro quo, and they can anonymously donate cash to buy elections and legislation.
And, as far as healthcare is concerned, prices began to climb when Nixon signed Ted Kennedy’s HMO bill into practice and liability began to make it unaffordable for smaller private practices to remain in business. . .which is a good example of my statement above- that HMO bill was the result of Kaiser’s lobbying efforts.
“We’re going to need options when Obamacare fails”
We’ll never have any good options. Republicans have no idea what socialism is, and so they think the ACA is socialist. Republicans will be gung ho for options like Murdoch hypes in the article you quoted- hospitals based on almost the exact same model for healthcare that they have in China that demand cash payment up front for services rendered and no possibility of insurance to mitigate costs. The difference between that model and China being the cost is much higher. The crazy thing is, Republicans will demand such a horrible system, and then when people are dying in the streets for lack of care, the Republicans will still blame the “liberals”.
Anarchist,
Happy New Year to you!
I have a healthy skepticism about all media from L, R, and center perspectives.
I can’t say with 100% certainty that all procedures at OK Surgery Center require follow-up care but it would certainly be required on some procedures such as total hips and total knees.
This center is one example of an attempt to let the market determine the health care costs.
We’re going to need options when Obamacare fails–which looks to be not too far off depending on the outcome of King v. Burwell.
Jeanie-
I’m always amazed when someone actually believes information that comes from Newscorp actually has any validity. We’re talking about the corporate fiefdom of Rupert Murdoch- a guy that was all but thrown out of the UK and caught red-handed using his wealth and media companies to attempt to capture the government. The guy ought to be chained to the wall in a granite cell a mile underground and fed gruel through a grate in an iron door, and you go to him for your news. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
“It’s a novel approach and is cutting out the middle man entirely.”
Well, it is novel. However, their prices don’t exactly make them accessible to most of the population. A cataract surgery (a half hour procedure) costs 4,000, which is more than the out of pocket max for most policies, and in the ballpark of the cost of the same surgery in a more traditional setting. And that cost must be paid in full at the time of surgery.
“he price for procedures, inclusive of doctor fees, initial consults and uncomplicated follow-up care. ”
Well, that declaration includes at least one blatant falsehood. There is no follow up care included in the cost.
“Should you be a candidate for surgery, the facility fee, surgeon’s fee, and anesthesiologist’s fee are included in the price.”
http://www.surgerycenterok.com/faq/
” employers are willing to foot the bill — flights, travel and lodging included.”
And about employers being willing to foot the bill- I find that highly unlikely when the cost of insurance per employee will be cheaper than a trip to OK and the cost of surgery at that facility.
However, the quotes you selected remind me of how upset people were when Rupert Murdoch bought the Wall Street journal. It looks like they had a point.
From Dec 12, 2014 WSJ MarketWatch:
…For example, the Surgery Center of Oklahoma guarantees the price for procedures, inclusive of doctor fees, initial consults and uncomplicated follow-up care. As a result, the business attracts patients from across the country. The cost is cheaper than local hospitals, and employers are willing to foot the bill — flights, travel and lodging included.
…….
The owners of the facility in Oklahoma advocate a free market-based approach to health care. They take no insurance. All of their prices (good for 60 days) are posted on the web and seem remarkably cheaper than other providers. The infection rates are low. http://www.surgerycenterok.com
This may be a good approach for some procedures as there are currently few cost controls in health care. Apparently the center is very busy.
I am not affiliated with center but have seen one of their owners on Stossel, etc. It’s a novel approach and is cutting out the middle man entirely.
“Is it really too much for you to try–even a little bit–to comprehend what Pogo might possibly have meant by “socialism by the installment plan””
Well, aside from the Celine reference, which I appreciate, it was just more mindless “conservative” scare-mongering based upon an ignorance of both political terms and American history.
Karen S.-
” Liberal Democrats took away my middle class financial security. ”
Bullsh!t. Liberal Democrats opposed the ACA once they stripped the public option from it. The reality is- there are very few, if any, liberal democrats in our federal government.
“I never was very political, and took the view that you-like-peas-I-like-carrots on political affiliation.
But no more. ”
You do nothing your entire life but live comfortably enough to neglect your duty in a Democracy and now you want to blame “liberal Democrats” because your costs have gone up. Lady, it isn’t the fault of the Liberal Democrats, the Republicans, or any other political group or party- it’s your fault. The rest of America has people like you to blame for the current state of our society. And I’m sorry, but becoming one more reactionary with zero awareness of actual political thought or ideals doesn’t do a goddamn thing for the country either. You’re like an anchor on a speed boat.
Karen, We may never get to the point where it hits employers if it’s deemed unconstitutional.
I just read the quote for my 2015 premiums. They are going up A LOT. I feel like I’ve been punched in the stomach. I thought 2014, almost $12,000/year for insurance PLUS out of pocket to see a doctor, was undoable.
We were never rich, but we were comfortably middle class. Liberal Democrats took away my middle class financial security. I never was very political, and took the view that you-like-peas-I-like-carrots on political affiliation.
But no more.
When a political party beggars the Middle Class in the pursuit of Big Government, it’s reprehensible. Obamacare galvanized me politically. Nothing makes you care about politics like having your insurance suddenly become unaffordable, as Gruber aptly predicted in 2009.
You just wait until this hits employers.
“What, me worry?”
Oh, and Happy New Year, nd.
Don’t worry nick, we’ll be starting the party soon. Got some excellent bubbly on ice.
Or you see a PCP at a walk-in clinic who sends you immediately to an excellent hospital that admits you instantly and where your nearly fatal condition is correctly diagnosed, treated by a team of excellent specialists using state-of-the-art equipment to save your ass, and followed up with years of outpatient care.
Nearly all of which gets paid for by the company that sold you a $51 a month individual policy, without a peep. All of it happening pre-Obamacare.
But some random guy on the internet had to see a specialist to get the right pills, so this system has surely gone off the rails!
ChipS, To answer your question, NO!! It is impossible for him to get off the soapbox and not give the boilerplate response. Happy New Year, Crimson Man. And Happy New Year to all, unless that is not PC. Then, HAPPY NEW YEAR and get a life this year!
The entire medical industry is a giant corporate welfare/Ponzi scheme. To see a doctor who treats much more than what a school nurse does, you first have to see/pay a PCP to “refer” you to the exorbitantly costly “specialist” who spends two minutes hearing your story, then sends you to a place that charges a big chunk of change for whatever diagnostic tests they perform – the results of which go to the specialist doctor to let him know what’s wrong with you (he’s too busy & incompetent to do the differential diagnosis himself). Then, you must return for another expensive five minutes for him to deliver the grim news and prescribe pills for you to purchase from the drug dealer at Walgreens. Your pills will last a month, you’ll then get the yips, and maybe your specialist’s nurse will okay another month’s fix.
Why blame BRONCO BAMA for doing what any powerful politician specializes in: schemes to transfer lucre to the rich.
Is it really too much for you to try–even a little bit–to comprehend what Pogo might possibly have meant by “socialism by the installment plan” before launching into a boring tirade that’s been done here many times already?
pogo-
“socialism by the installment plan.”
Why do conservatives always insist on using political terms as pejoratives? Is it really too much to ask that you crack a dictionary and actually learn the definition of the terms that you use?
There’s nothing socialist about the ACA. Any prospect of socialism went out the window with a public option. This is State capitalism pure and simple- the State protecting the profits of the private sector.
Our healthcare system spun completely off the rails and became the most costly system of any Western nation (the rest of which are almost uniformly socialist, by the way) and so healthcare lobbyists enlisted government as the watchdog to protect the profits of their unsustainable system. Before, people that couldn’t afford healthcare had to go without, now their inability to afford healthcare is met with fines and it will soon be criminalized.
The winners in this system are the CEO’s and the investors- that isn’t socialism, that’s what socialism is designed to fight against.
“theebl” 🙂 …oh, there really are simpler answers, at less cost, just no politicians who will entertain them. I’ve worn out my welcome on proposing the idea…but none the less it exists. My plan costs just over $800 per month, single coverage, with about $350 cost to me all told (Medicare, etc.)…and that figure would be reduced by means testing for the indigent. It is portable and covers pre-existing conditions, etc. Seems to me like the money has to be spread around…a lot…and not to the people in need.
Brad…all I can say is Wow! That said, my coverage cost would have been the same except that I’d have received a bill for $100. Minor difference there, eh? My coverage is that nationwide health care plan that both Democrats in the past and Republicans in the present have proposed as an alternative to the ACA, both before it and since enactment. All of that to no response by other politicians (or here for that matter) what-so-ever…not good enough, etc. It’s not like I don’t know what I am talking about, given I am under that plan….which has worked well for 50+ years, and yes, it is a federal plan, with private insurance coverage,….that could have been adapted to take care of what the ACA purports to cover, and saved a pile of money doing so.
I am beginning to think (I am slow ya’ know) that our health care is in the same boat as college student loans…debt driving increased costs, by design.
Here is a link to an article we had earlier on the cost of a heart attack.
http://jonathanturley.org/2014/08/02/a-heart-attack-and-the-numbers/
This is one of the reasons the fact that Gruber said they knew the ACA had no intent on cutting costs makes this so scandalous.
The US health system has its problems. But if you think Canada and Western Europe are so great, you really need to speak to people dealing with treatment there. It is true you to not have the nightmare of battling the insurance companies for co-pays, deductibles and payments (as much) but you also have limited options for treatment. And you certainly pay for it through higher taxes on virtually everything. http://www.ibtimes.com/gas-prices-pump-europeans-pay-almost-twice-much-us-residents-1322727
There is no easy answer to all of this.