Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Grubergate, part 2

Or, if you prefer, Gruber 2: Stupid and Stupider.

I outlined yesterday how I believe a GOP truly committed to the wishes of those it purports to represent would go about building strong, bi-partisan grassroots support for repeal — and laid out the tactics and strategy that could pin Obama and many vulnerable congressional Dems into a corner.

As Gruber’s new lie, that he spoke off the cuff and wished to walk the comments back, is shown by subsequent videos as but the next iteration of hoping to take advantage of the “stupidity” of the American voter (though it’s worth noting, not a single Republican voted for the ACA, and the “wacko birds” on the right flank of the party have been pushing for repeal ceaselessly, even as the establicans have signaled their comfort level with much of the law), the task for the GOP becomes even easier: by splicing together the various instances that are no doubt going to start surfacing of Gruber boasting of having fooled the dull-witted electorate (who, it needs to be pointed out, make up the Democratic Party base), and running beneath them a concise subtitle message speaking to transparency, the rule of law, and representative government — perhaps peppered with condemnations from, say, Trey Gowdy — the GOP could then force Obama to veto repeal bill after repeal bill under the shadow of what it’s architect admitted was a giant scam, a ruse, a lie, all of it designed because for the left, the ends justify the means.

The Democrats have already begun to counter by seeking to airbrush Comrade Gruber from its legislative history — another in a long line of useful idiots who have since found mashed under the treads of Obama’s progressive bus and its single, forward gear.

It is all well and good to issue press releases or go on shows seen only by news junkies. But if the GOP were serious about its campaign promise to repeal ObamaCare, they’ve been handed the material necessary to do so — and in the process, show Obama as the obstructionist and harm, in the process, Hilary Clinton, who can likewise be tied to ObamaCare, or at least to nationalized health care.

Will they do it? Probably not.

But that doesn’t mean, say, the Koch Brothers and other big name libertarian and constitutional conservative donors can’t finance the very ad campaign I’ve suggested. It beats pouring money into the coffers of a party or candidate who, in the end, tries with remarkably tenacity to maintain the status quo, regardless of what political party it putatively favors.

72 Replies to “Grubergate, part 2”

  1. DarthLevin says:

    I’ve been thinking that this isn’t news to me, that we’ve known this for awhile now, and why is this considered “new” information.

    Then I realized: This revelation is new, namely that Gruber admitted the confusing language in the bill was deliberately inserted so as to dupe us hicktarded rubes that infest our Betters’ food production lands. What I was thinking of was what’s going to SCOTUS in Halbig, the videos where Gruber makes his “speak-o” about the intended recipients of subsidies.

    So we have known for awhile what Gruber and, by extension, the Obama administration and Congressional progressives think of us. It’s just that now we know more of it.

    Unfortunately, I think the lesson the left will take from this is that video recorders are evil and should be banned. At least if it’s pointed at a member of the favored elite.

  2. geoffb says:

    Gruber writes [lofo] “books” too.

  3. geoffb says:

    Buy it, or look inside at Amazon.

  4. guinspen says:

    Some folks, who should know better, will always be unwilling to consistently recognize flaming red flags.

  5. Ernst Schreiber says:

    flaming red flags?

    Not only anti-communist, but homophobic as well.

    For shame.

  6. DarthLevin says:

    And it looks like we have video #3

  7. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Rush was ripping on that MSNBC “interview” a bit earlier.

    The media is so in the tank for the Left that they enjoy being in on the lie as much as masterminds like Gruber enjoy lying to the rubes.

  8. Ernst Schreiber says:

    See, this is why I can’t buy Kennedy assassination theories, or faked-moon landing theories or any of that other conspiracy non-sense.

    This guy can’t shut up about how they pulled the wool over the eyes of idiot voters everywhere. Yet I’m supposed to believe the fact that no credible evidence of a conspiracy has ever been presented simply goes to show just how vast the conspiracy is.

  9. BigBangHunter says:

    – The truth is out there Ernst. Unfortunately the American electorate wouldn’t know the truth if it was stapled to their faces.

    – The Left feels perfectly safe in outright mocking and admitting their perfidies because the citizenry is oblivious to anything more complicated than this weeks over/under on the NFL or NBA.

  10. BigBangHunter says:

    …..Which, you know, is just one more reason not to have a coronary over what is painfully obvious. We deserve the fucked up Progressives, we just don’t care.

  11. bgbear says:

    All this reminds me of this Steve Martin bit:

    Whew! You know why people can get away with stuff like that? I’ll tell you exactly why people get away with that. Because the public has a short memory. That’s why all these big stars do these crazy, terrible things and two years later they’re back in the biz, you know. ‘Cause the public has a short memory. Let me give you a little test, okay? This is my thesis — the public has a short memory and, like– How many people remember, a couple of years ago, when the Earth blew up? How many people? See? So few people remember. And you would think that something like that, people would remember. But NOOO! You don’t remember that? The Earth blew up and was completely destroyed? And we escaped to this planet on the giant Space Ark? Where have you people been? And the government decided not to tell the stupider people ’cause they thought that it might affect– [dawning realization, looks around] Ohhhh! Okay! Uh, let’s move on!

  12. Don’t forget the NHL, BBH!

  13. DarthLevin says:

    If we want people to accept the truth about the progressive movement and their desire to control all aspects of our lives, we’ll have to make a superhero movie about it.

    With fart jokes. Gotta have the fart jokes.

  14. Our only hope for the ad campaign Jeff suggests is some private citizens having the Will to fund it and carry it through as far as it needs to be.

    And I see the main purpose of the ad campaign to be helping us get the necessary support for a Convention Of The States. The national government, so infested is it with Leftist Cancer Virus, is a lost cause at this point. Our Article V effort is the sole hope of avoiding violence and/or effecting a separation of several of the Several States.

    My extensive readings of primary source material from, roughly, 1760-1776 over the past two years have convinced me of this.

  15. bgbear says:

    I am starting to think that Gruber’s brothers Hans and Simone had better morals.

  16. Blake says:

    Speaking of stupid Americans, check out this piece by J Effn Kerry.

    Our demonstrably stupid Secretary of State agrees to a handshake agreement with China regarding cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions. Exhibit A of whom Mr. Gruber was referring to.

    For exhibit B, I point you to the comments section of the NY Times J Effn Kerry oped. I first looked at the reader comments selected by the Times, and, no surprise, the Times went with the hosanna John Kerry comments.

    I then checked the “reader selected” comments, thinking there was a chance there might be a bit more balance. Nope, more hosannas for an unenforceable agreement.

    I have to give Gruber his due and admit that he has a point.

  17. Ernst Schreiber says:

    You’re looking at this the wrong way. This isn’t about global warming or reducing green house gasses. It’s about creating the appearance of an agreement in order to justify more regulation and constraints on economic growth.

    Because Leftists like growing the regulatory at the expense of the economy. It’s a win-win you see.

  18. bgbear says:

    I think most of us that are not too stupid understand that some folk are dumber than others, we just don’t exploit it. Unlike Mr. Kerry who sounds like he would endorse knocking down old ladies and stealing their purse.

  19. McGehee says:

    The truth is out there Ernst.

    And the theories, even more so.

    Saw a heating-and-air service van today with a bumper sticker: “9-11 Was An Inside Job.”

    Won’t be calling that company to service our HVAC.

  20. bgbear says:

    Funny, I saw a service vehicle (something computer related cant recall exactly) about a month ago with the same sort of bumper sticker. I guess they have to be in business for themselves because who would employ them or want to work with them?

  21. Blake says:

    McGehee, perhaps you could hire the HVAC company as after dinner entertainment? Then, after they complain, you could give them the standard quizzical look and ask “you mean the bumper sticker actually represents your views and isn’t advertisement?”

  22. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I was going to say something about calling the company and letting them know why you wouldn’t be calling them to employ their services, but then bgbear pointed out that only a self employed idiot would put something like that on a service vehicle.

    Maybe the guys a subcontractor? Or whatever you’d call an hvac technician who had to provide his own work vehicle.

    I suppose that’s another way of saying self-employed though, isn’t it?

  23. McGehee says:

    Or whatever you’d call an hvac technician who had to provide his own work vehicle.

    “Last Resort.”

  24. bgbear says:

    Strong personalities own their own businesses.

    One of the long established locksmiths in town used to play pro-life lectures at a good volume in the shop. Brave for liberal Santa Cruz, CA. However, it was back in the 80s and 90s and I do not recall the left being so looney about abortion back then. They disagreed with the “religious right” but, I do not recall anyone saying you were “anti-woman” if you were pro-life.

  25. newrouter says:

    used healthcare system salesman aren’t very honest are they?

  26. […] As he points out in a follow-up post from today: […]

  27. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Not everyone can be as trustworthy as used car salemen you know.

    Or as ethical as pornographers, for that matter.

    At least used healthcare system salesman aren’t politicians.

  28. bh says:

    Towards Jeff’s thought they may as well make hay out of the fact that they can name bills.

    The “Obama Thinks You’re a Fool and a Serf Act of 2015” would be fun to watch vetoed.

    Or, maybe, “Everyone Who Worked on and Enacted the ACA Was a Damn Liar — I mean, c’mon they’ve all admitted it now — Act of 2015”.

  29. bh says:

    Maybe, “The First of Many Retorts to a Petulant Man-Child Act”.

  30. newrouter says:

    shoot the messenger news

    >“Consultants for former Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis warned the campaign in January that it was heading for a humiliating defeat on Election Day if it didn’t make changes quick, according to a memo obtained by the Texas Tribune. The campaign took that advice and made one change in particular — it fired those consultants.”<

    link

  31. serr8d says:

    We knew that this phase of ACA was only the lead act for what’s coming next, a full-fledged single-payer platform that is the Left’s wet dream. Howard Dean’s phony outrage is a first sweeping of the stage. Obama will be unwillingly forced to play the Democrat’s best fall guy evah. Hillary will stumble (or be shoved, more likely, because she is mightily toxtc), setting the stage for another magical mystery unicorn to ride to Rube USA’s rescue, if not in 2016 then 2020 for sure.

    The Democrats won big with Obama; there’s the act they will be desperate to repeat..when their time is right again. Events are certain to break desperate in the next years (months?), so Dems will likeky cede the GOP the Oval Office 2016 so as to prepare for a breakout 2020.

    If this Republic can limp through one or two more Decembers, that is. And that’s iffy, less than 30% likely I’d guess.

  32. newrouter says:

    >If this Republic can limp through one or two more Decembers, that is. And that’s iffy, less than 30% likely I’d guess.<

    Nancy Pelosi: That wasn’t a wave

    i say reality for the win.

    “A Time for Choosing” by Ronald Reagan

  33. Mark Levin tonight…

    These ‘pieces of you know what‘ masterminds who have tenure at universities, the last refugees of the old Soviet Union, and their political puppets, they should thank God every single day that we are a peaceful, law abiding people. Because this is what revolutions are made of ladies and gentlemen…I’m not kidding. This is what sparks rebellions.

    -Mentioned Also: tarring and feathering, Mitt/Romneycare, rebellion, those who go to Washington and ‘make peace with Tyranny’.

    -Come on, Mark, take the last step: go OUTLAW.

    http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-this-is-what-revolutions-are-made-of-im-not-kidding/

  34. Thank you, Protein Angel.

  35. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Somebody (North, Galles, Benson Jr.) left out the part about stealing all the tribal lands between the Appalachians and the Mississippi.

  36. BigBangHunter says:

    – Opps, he did it again…..

    – Apparently ‘Grubner the stupider of Nottingham’ has a third instance of explaining just how crooked the Left is and how cattle prod dumb the electorate is. I don’t have a link at the moment but they were showing it on FOX a few minutes ago.

  37. BigBangHunter says:

    – Also this and this.

    – At what point does all of these revelations begin to actually poop on the Progressives parade? (Those that are left actually since millions will now start to claim they never heard the word before.)

  38. BigBangHunter says:

    – She’ll be cummin around the Grubner when she comes.

    – Landrieu is fighting for her life and running away from the Democrats engroup, pushing for the XL pipeline now of all things. Last weeks results must have her wetting her depends.

  39. John Bradley says:

    Luckily she “lives with her parents”, so at least she’ll have someone around to change her…

  40. DarthLevin says:

    Towards Jeff’s thought they may as well make hay out of the fact that they can name bills.

    I’d love them to name a bill “Sign If You Love Jesus And Are The Smartest President Ever, Veto If You Faked Your Birth Certificate And You’re Really A Muslim”. Just to mess with him.

  41. serr8d says:

    There’s truth in this mapanalysis, much to the chagrin of leash-holding “gentry liberals”..

    Analysts who separate Americans into two tidy categories — white and nonwhite — assume that the nonwhite category will grow and that whites can’t vote any more Republican than they have historically. Presto, a Democratic America.

    The first assumption is well founded. But Hispanics and Asians are not replicating blacks’ voting behavior, just as they haven’t shared their unique historic heritage. In some states they’re voting more like whites than blacks.

    The second assumption may not be true at all. History shows that self-conscious minorities tend to vote cohesively, as blacks have for 150 years and Southern whites did for 90. It’s an understandable response to feeling outnumbered and faced with an unappealing agenda.

    In that case, Romney’s 59 percent or House Republicans’ 60 percent among whites may turn out to be more a floor than a ceiling. And that map may become increasingly familiar.

    Yes, They Will need seed another Unicorn.

  42. OK, back in the day when Roberts fucked the dog and birthed this pile of shit, Jeff and I had a short scuffle in the comments because I thought that Roberts had it right, that the O-care mandate was meant to be a tax, specifically to be a tax, and even though the language of the law was meant to obfuscate the fact that it is a tax, it is no more not a tax than a giraffe is not a giraffe if you call it an ass. That’s not to say Roberts couldn’t have shut this trainload of dicks down, just that the reasoning he had behind using this information to uphold the mandate was, taken on its face, correct.

    What Roberts failed to realize is that though he assumed there would be electoral penalties for engaging in this type of deceit, there really isn’t. When this Gruber jackass goes on record with his opinion that the American voter is an imbecile, he’s also correct. The American voter will, in fact, vote for the privilege of being fucked in the ass with a spiky telephone pole, as long as it’s lubed with the promise of someone else’s money.

    The only way to reverse this is to legislatively reduce Congress’ power to tax. The only way to do that is to start a new country on an atoll in the Pacific and quickly develop nuclear strike capability.

    Who’s with me?

  43. McGehee says:

    I was on Jeff’s side back then, LMC, and still am.

    If Congress enacts something as “not a tax,” the courts rightly should take Congress at its word and examine the enactment on that basis.

    Furthermore, if the individual mandate penalty were a tax, the bill containing it was constitutionally required to originate in the House. Thus there is no way for the law to be constitutional.

    Therefore, by finding the law constitutional, Roberts violated his own constitutional duty no matter how you look at it. He ought to be impeached for it.

  44. serr8d says:

    Wow..teensy, tiny snowflakes! And not even Thanksgiving!

    Had a thought whilst shoveling the driveway..

    ..seems that with Barky daily dragging down Democrats’ prestige (acting all nicotourettes’ in China; being deftly placed amongst in Old Wives’ Club for photos), some taciturn “gentry liberals” might wistfully eye another role for him..

    First thing Republicans should do when they convene next year? Superfund the Secret Service.

  45. I’m not saying he couldn’t or shouldn’t have killed it for other reasons, but they had passed taxes called licenses, penalties, fees, etc… before and those were found constitutional.

    I still think he was too smart by half, playing teacher to a bunch of fuck-ups who didn’t want to learn. He assumed that once he “outed” the tax the public would rise up and fix the problem. Instead, the GOP nominated Romney and re-elected Obama. Mitch and Boner aren’t going to change a damn word of that law, and neither will any of the new guys. And Congress now has the power to tax you if you don’t buy something.

    That would be the fix, to limit Congress’ power to tax by defining “economic activity” to mean actual economic activity.

  46. Serr8d wrote: First thing Republicans should do when they convene next year? Superfund the Secret Service.

    It wouldn’t surprise me if The Jarret Junto is considering the Martyr Option because I’ve been getting the feeling lately that they’ve watched way too many movies and TV shows and have come to think the World works like what they see in them. I mean, it seems like we’re living in a Rob Reiner movie or Aaron Sorkin show, except the fourth acts are always being taken over and written by Nemesis. Hence, the embarrassing serial FAIL’s.

  47. McGehee says:

    they had passed taxes called licenses, penalties, fees, etc… before and those were found constitutional.

    In which house did those bills originate?

    The Constitution prescribes process, not outcomes. That’s because process matters. Progressives want outcomes by whatever means they find to be necessary. Roberts ratified an outcome with criminal disregard for process.

  48. I know McGehee, but that’s not the question that Roberts was answering.

  49. Mueller says:

    LMC
    Remember when I told you it was a tax.

  50. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Re: that map of the political future:

    Rush Limbaugh made a really good point about that map to a caller earlier this week or at the end of last week.

    And that point is: half of the country’s populace live in those tiny spots of cancer blue.

  51. Ernst Schreiber says:

    That would be the fix, to limit Congress’ power to tax by defining “economic activity” to mean actual economic activity.

    If inactivity isn’t the activity of doing nothing, how will Obama be able to represent the voters who voted by not voting?

    Why do you hate Democracy and Freedom?

  52. geoffb says:

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-politics/choice-2012/the-frontline-interview-jonathan-gruber/

    Well, and then there was a man named Scott Brown.

    And that was a real stressful point. So basically, the night before Christmas it passes the Senate. The House had already passed their version, which was even more to the left. We’re like, “This is great.” I went on vacation with my family. We celebrated. This is the greatest thing in the world. We’re so excited, you know, and my wife said, “Are you sure, Jon?” I said, “Look, unless someone dies or somehow some Republican wins in Massachusetts, we’re fine.”

    Well, lo and behold, we had a pretty awful candidate for Senate who didn’t know the Red Sox from the Blue Sox, and Scott Brown wins. And now we’ve got a problem because now we can’t get back to 60 votes in the Senate. …

    Now you’ve got a problem. And this is where Obama showed his leader[ship]. I mean, this is I think one of the incredibly proud moments, which is at that point a lot of people said: “Well, good try. But you know what? Salvage the things people like, and cut and run, because the truth is, you just can’t get this done. Look at those town halls. It is so unpopular. You just can’t do it.”

    And, you know, someone used to say to me, it’s sort of ironic that if you look at John F. Kennedy’s book called Profiles in Courage, they were all about times politicians didn’t listen to the public and did what was right, not what political expediency would say. And this was a profile in courage. I mean, he basically said: “You know, look, this is the right thing to do. We are going to do it. I’m going to fight for it.” …

    Of course he and the Democrats paid the price for those hard votes in the midterm election.

    You know, they did. It is so unfortunate, the misunderstanding about this law. I’ve actually written a comic book, a graphic novel to try to explain the health care law that has actually sold pretty well and it’s done pretty well, just because people don’t understand this law. … And it’s sufficiently complicated that, you know, anything that takes two sentences to explain in America today will be shouted down by a one-sentence lie. And it takes more than two sentences to explain the Affordable Care Act, and so people can lie.

    In my comic book I have monsters representing the myths about the health care reform. You know, this is not socialized medicine. In fact, it expands the private health insurance sector.

    This is not a federal takeover. There is a huge role for states in implementing health care reform. There are all these lies that opponents just realized they could put out there, and it was a complicated enough bill that they could get away with it. And it’s unfortunate that it has worked out that way. …

  53. McGehee says:

    that’s not the question that Roberts was answering.

    Right. He was answering a question neither side’s lawyers had asked in their filings or arguments. Which made the answer he gave, firmly outside his authority.

  54. newrouter says:

    @geoffb

    do you have the link to my you tube upload of jeff g’s hot air video?

  55. BigBangHunter says:

    I know McGehee, but that’s not the question that Roberts was answering.

    – The oldest liars trick in the book. Pelosi did it today. When your ass is grass on what ever is being discussed deflect by answering unasked questions.

    – To wit; When she was asked to explain Grubmangate she launched into a two pronged pile of deflecting bullshit. First off she said she never heard of him, then she said “he didn’t help us write the bill.”

    – The Left will lie without batting an eyelash, they are all a pos. Back in 2009 she admonished reporters who were daring to ask policy questions about Ocare by lecturing them that they should be reading Grubman’s technical inputs on the bill. But she doesn’t know him.

    – Progressives should all be summarily shot.

  56. geoffb says:

    Sorry nr, I was doing something else for a while. I have the video on my HD but not the link. Now however I have bookmarked it so I will have it if needed again.

  57. geoffb says:

    The story begins in Massachusetts where Gruber helped create the state’s universal health law, now known as Romneycare.

    “We had a pretty powerful senator you may have heard of named Ted Kennedy,” Gruber said during an event at Simmons College in February. ”Ted Kennedy had managed to figure out a way to rip off the federal Medicaid program to the tune of about $500 million a year through a series of strange manipulations.

    “Here was Mitt Romney’s dirty little secret that we don’t like to talk about in Massachusetts, which is the way we passed our law is the federal government paid for it.

  58. geoffb says:

    And so the “why” of why didn’t the Republicans and Romney go after Obama and Obamacare hammer and tongs is revealed publicly.

  59. Pablo says:

    I know McGehee, but that’s not the question that Roberts was answering.

    I said at the time of the decision that Roberts was right. It is and always has been a tax, but they lied about it being one. Their lies don’t change the fact that it is and always has been a tax. The question was not whether it was what they sold it as.

  60. McGehee says:

    I’m going to say this again, slowly, and leave it alone hereafter:

    It wasn’t passed as a tax, therefore the Court had no business treating it as one.

    Failing to grasp this obligation on the judiciary over the years (long before Obamacare) has contributed at least as much to our present predicament as anything else we argue about around here.

  61. Pablo says:

    What would it have looked like if they had “passed it as a tax?” It would be the same damn thing. They just wouldn’t have lied and it wouldn’t have passed.

  62. Ernst Schreiber says:

    It wasn’t passed as a tax, therefore the Court had no business treating it as one.

    Or, if the Court was going to declare it a tax, they should have overturned it since the law originated in the Senate and not the House.

    And so the “why” of why didn’t the Republicans and Romney go after Obama and Obamacare hammer and tongs is revealed publicly.

    Gee, if only we’d listened to Rick Santorum more and worried less about getting his icky god-botheriness on ourselves.

  63. geoffb says:

    So what was Gruber paid to do?

    From Ace.

    In 2009, just one month after President Obama took office, the Department of Health and Human Services put out a sole-source solicitation titled “Technical Assistance in Evaluating Options for Health Reform.” The contract would be with Gruber, who the document said was the only person “reasonably available to satisfy agency requirements.”

    As the agency put it, “Dr. Gruber developed a proprietary statistically sophisticated micro-simulation model that has the flexibility to ascertain the distribution of changes in health care spending and public and private sector health care costs due to a large variety of changes in health insurance benefit design, public program eligibility criteria, and tax policy.”

    The model, the Gruber Microsimulation Model, is the coin of the realm, in large part because it is similar to the model used by the Congressional Budget Office. That means administration policy-makers could predict with reasonable certainty how CBO would score legislation. Given that legislation in Washington often falls or rises depending on the CBO score, that made this model a very powerful tool for administration officials.

    The first four months of the contract could not be found on the FedBizOpp.gov Web site, but in June 2009, HHS renewed the contract for eight months, with a value of $297,600. Gruber in an e-mail confirmed that the first part of the contract was for $95,000.

  64. LBascom says:

    Gee, if only we’d listened to Rick Santorum more and worried less about getting his icky god-botheriness on ourselves.

    Sometime in the last generation or so the USA stopped being a Christian nation, in the name of inclusiveness. Wasn’t fair to the secularists, Muslims, queers and Buddhists you see. Plus the (relatively) new discovery of a wall separating church and state (never mind the traditions of presidential inaugurations with a hand on a bible or congressional sessions beginning with a prayer to Jesus Christ) along with the modern notion the founders placed no weight on Christian faith at all, but rather an ancient Greek inspired idea of modern natural law.

    So now we live in a country resting on a foundation of philosophical multiculturalism. Christianity is regarded no better than any other belief system, worse than many, and has no place in public regardless.

    A fine sowing of the wind it’s been. The reaping is shaping up to be a humdinger.

  65. geoffb says:

    On the “Cadillac plan tax,”

    “Economists have called for 40 years to get rid of the regressive, inefficient and expensive tax subsidy provided for employer provider health insurance,” Gruber said at the Pioneer Institute for public policy research in Boston. The subsidy is “terrible policy,” Gruber said.

    “It turns out politically it’s really hard to get rid of,” Gruber said. “And the only way we could get rid of it was first by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people when we all know it’s a tax on people who hold those insurance plans.”

    […]

    The second way was have the tax kick in “late, starting in 2018. But by starting it late, we were able to tie the cap for Cadillac Tax to CPI, not medical inflation,” Gruber said. CPI is the consumer price index, which is lower than medical inflation.

    Gruber explains that by drafting the bill this way, they were able to pass something that would initially only impact some employer plans though it would eventually hit almost every employer plan. And by that time, those who object to the tax will be obligated to figure out how to come up with the money that repealing the tax will take from the treasury, or risk significantly adding to the national debt.

    “What that means is the tax that starts out hitting only 8% of the insurance plans essentially amounts over the next 20 years essentially getting rid of the exclusion for employer sponsored plans,” Gruber said. “This was the only political way we were ever going to take on one of the worst public policies in America.”

  66. geoffb says:

    I just remembered that I’d read about the MIT Economics Dept. before in relation to the Obama administration. Posted a comment about it back in 2012. The links to the two pieces quoted are no good anymore but these, link1, link2, should work.

Comments are closed.