Patterico's Pontifications

12/9/2014

More Gruber Highlights

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:47 pm



Think of them as quotes of the day. First, my man Justin Amash:

“What did you mean when you repeatedly said that the citizens of some states may not quality for Obamacare tax credits?” asked Amash.

“When I made those comments, I believe I was reflecting uncertainty about the federal exchange,” said Gruber. “I don’t recall exactly what the law says.”

“I’m sorry,” said Amash. “You ran the economic model on Obamacare and you don’t recall what the law says?”

Next, Trey Gowdy:

A reader who is a friend especially recommends this video:

40 Responses to “More Gruber Highlights”

  1. The second video is brutal.

    aunursa (932331)

  2. can Gruber be held in contempt or brought up on perjury charges?
    Is he still getting paid by Vermont after today? (i know they said they fired him but much like our President they talk but don’t walk)

    seeRpea (01f6d3)

  3. I wish the questioning would go more to Gruber’s admission that Obamacare was based on lies and not how stupid he thinks voters are.

    AZ Bob (34bb80)

  4. Gruber is a lousy and stupid economist if he believes in central planning.

    Otto Maddox (990b3b)

  5. “central planning” has made him a LOT of money, so why shouldn’t he believe in it?

    seeRpea (01f6d3)

  6. d.c. should be burning

    mg (31009b)

  7. The republican party is nothing more than a mouth piece for the chamber of commerce. But munchers all of them.
    Nothing will happen to gruber, why all the fuss?
    Die boehner die.

    mg (31009b)

  8. John Podhoretz’s column today:

    http://nypost.com/2014/12/10/exposing-deceit-as-he-humbly-begs-our-pardon/

    It’sa little bot unclear to me what Podhoretz is saying, but he says Gruber tried to avoid answering some questions, like how much he was paid for his “microsimulations.” He referred toa financial disclosure form which was very incomplete.

    The method that the CBO uses is apparently not comopletely transparent, or predictable. So he had to revserse engineer it.

    Sammy Finkelman (7e7e58)

  9. I’m having this fantasy: Trey Gowdy tells me “Mr. nk, you said the American voters are stupid”. And I gesture in front of me, with both hands, palms down fingers out, in a quarter circle, to indicate all the committee, and say “Res ipsa loquitor”.

    nk (dbc370)

  10. Res ipsa loquitor

    My Spanish is a little rusty, but “beef is for broadcasting?”

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  11. Gruber’s description of himself is right out of the liberal playbook:

    “Glib, thoughtless . . . uninformed . . . mean and insulting . . . uncalled for in any contest . . . demeaning . . . inexcusable arrogance.”

    AZ Bob (34bb80)

  12. Heh! Not quite, carlitos. “The thing speaks for itself”. Self-evident.

    nk (dbc370)

  13. Just kidding, nk. 🙂

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  14. Yes, as aunursa said, if you haven’t seen #2, watch it to the end, it’s about as close to a kick to the teeth as you are going to see.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  15. I went and looked it up. The Spanish res for beef is probably from Arabic. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27940355?uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21105426312873 When we stop learning, we stop growing.

    nk (dbc370)

  16. The left does not do economics. They do politics and elections and lying to get past the “stupid voters” but, when pressed, nothing they do qualifies as numerically or mathematically sound.

    Obama and the Democrat leaders knew that Hillary made enemies of the insurance companies in 1992. The insurance companies funded devastating TV ads with “Harry and Louise” that cost the Democrats Congress in 1994. Therefore, they had to do what was necessary to get the insurance companies “inside the tent pissing out and not outside the tent pissing in” in Lyndon Johnson’s immortal words.

    Insurance companies have considered health insurance a loser for 25 years now. What they prefer is becoming “Administrative Service Organizations” which administer self funded health plans by employers.

    Corporate benefits include- organizing/ negotiating health insurance, group dental, STD, LTD, life, etc.

    The plan the Democrats came up with, with Gruber’s help, was to make the government the funding entity and pay the insurance companies to run the program. That way everybody is happy, except, of course, the taxpayer. The taxpayer does not like tax increases which would be needed to pay the bills. Therefore the taxpayer has to be fooled.

    Without the taxes to pay the bills, the whole plan collapses. At its base, Obamacare is Medicaid for everyone. The employer mandate has been, contrary to the text of the law, postponed as the flaws in implementation appear. If it were to be enforced, there would be a revolution. The funding from employee plans is called “The Cadillac Tax which is an excise tax on employer plans that exceed the benefits of Medicaid.

    As health coverage expands to tens of millions of Americans–through Medicaid expansion in states and the new state health insurance exchanges that will soon begin selling individual health coverage–some Americans with employer-sponsored health coverage are seeing their benefits decrease.

    One of the most significant, and controversial, provisions of the Affordable Care Act is the new excise tax on high-cost health plans proposed to both slow the rate of growth of health costs and finance the expansion of health coverage. The provision is often called the “Cadillac” tax because it targets so-called Cadillac health plans that provide workers the most generous level of health benefits. These high-end health plans’ premiums are paid for mostly by employers. They also have low, if any, deductibles and little cost sharing for employees.

    If this is ever implemented, the Medicaid-for-all nature of Obamacare will become obvious. That’s why it will not happen. The fundamental premise behind Obamacare is not viable. That is why it will fail and the numbers do not add up.

    Gruber can’t say this.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  17. While admitting his arrogance, I believe he also proves to be dishonest.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  18. While the testimony yesterday was entertaining, I still think (surprise surprise) that Team R really missed an opportunity. Focusing on the stupid stupid parts really let him off the hook for the other rancid things he did.

    JD (86a5eb)

  19. Gruber’s description of himself is right out of the liberal playbook:

    “Glib, thoughtless . . . uninformed . . . mean and insulting . . . uncalled for in any contest . . . demeaning . . . inexcusable arrogance.”
    ….
    Focusing on the stupid stupid parts really let him off the hook for the other rancid things he did.

    He took one for the team. Abased himself to conceal that everything he said was the truth.

    nk (dbc370)

  20. I think Gruber could give Jerry Lewis a run for his money if cast as “The Nutty Professor”. What a wanker.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  21. Like all lefties, Gruber’s intentions were good, by their playbook, nk. The results? Not so much, but that doesn’t matter to them at all, so they’ll lie about it.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  22. When we stop learning, we stop growing.

    nk (dbc370) — 12/10/2014 @ 7:50 am

    Thanks. My lame joke only works semi-phonetically. “Res es pa’ locutor”

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  23. SCOTUS will put this dog out of its misery. The Grube handed them the utensil.

    DNF (7b206c)

  24. I did not provide official scoring … [looking earnest] … [but that wasn’t the question]
    I apologize for my inappropriate inopportune terminology …[looking regretful] … [another dodge]
    I did not draft legislation … [looking defensive] … [but, again, that wasn’t the question, the question was how did he help the administration]
    I don’t run CBO, I don’t draft legislation … [why are you asking me these things] …[but she didn’t ask whether he ran CBO, nor how he drafted the legislation]
    … that was an effort to seem more important than I was … [ contritely] … [they did pay you for something didn’t they?]
    I was speaking glibly … [smirk] … [yes you’ve already suggested that]
    They were not lies … [quietly, looking serious] … [not everything for sure, he’d be on firmer ground to have said they were not ALL lies]

    Gruber was well coached. He took the stand as though he’d been charged with impersonating the CBO and a Congresscritter, and answered all the questions as though that was the underlying issue.

    Sammy’s going to have figure this one out.

    bobathome (348c8a)

  25. shocker, JD, and they fully funded his Frankenstein creation, yay team

    narciso (ee1f88)

  26. bobathome (348c8a) — 12/10/2014 @ 9:51 am

    He took the stand as though he’d been charged with impersonating the CBO and a Congresscritter, and answered all the questions as though that was the underlying issue.

    Sammy’s going to have figure this one out.

    He was, by some people, charged with doing what actually the CBO or Congresscritters or their staff did.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/29/business/jonathan-gruber-health-cares-mr-mandate.html?pagewanted=all

    “The most important arbiter of everything was the C.B.O.,” said Neera Tanden, who was a senior adviser for health reform at the Department of Health and Human Services.

    The C.B.O.’s assessment of a bill’s efficacy and costs strongly influences political debate, but the office does not publicly reveal how it calculates those numbers.

    “We knew the numbers he gave us would be close to where the C.B.O. was likely to come out,” Ms. Tanden said. She was right.

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2014/07/25/mit-gruber-obamacare-architect-calls-his-statements-video-mistake/q1kkjC9zpQXLJuxhlY2HbJ/story.html

    At issue is Congress’s intent in writing the law, which Gruber had a central role in crafting as a paid adviser to the Department of Health and Human Services.

    Sammy Finkelman (7e7e58)

  27. Also from that March 29, 2012 New York Times article:

    Mr. Gruber has spent decades modeling the intricacies of the health care ecosystem, which involves making predictions about how new laws will play out based on past experience and economic theory. It is his research that convinced the Obama administration that health care reform could not work without requiring everyone to buy insurance….

    ….That said, it is difficult for too many other experts to categorically refute Mr. Gruber’s work, since he has nearly cornered the market on the technical science behind these sorts of predictions. Other models exist — built by nonprofits like the RAND Corporation or private consultancies like the Lewin Group — but they all use Mr. Gruber’s work as a benchmark, according to Jean Abraham, a health economist at the University of Minnesota and former senior economist in both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations…

    ……Along with these credentials, Mr. Gruber’s position as an adviser to the influential Congressional Budget Office also left him perfectly positioned to advise the White House on health reform.

    Sammy Finkelman (7e7e58)

  28. Now these statements:

    I did not provide official scoring Right. What he did was attempt to predict what the official score would be. He was able to do so in part because he had some inside information as to way it worked, and he also told the CBO himself what would happen in certain contingencies. He was their source, and, in fact, everybody’s source for some things.

    He had also developed a model that was pretty good at tracking the CBO, or that’s what they seem to say.

    I did not draft legislation No, he answered questions about what the score would be – also maybe if a proposed version of legislation would still do what they thinking it would do.

    Sammy Finkelman (7e7e58)

  29. Gruber was very careful not to say anything bad about any member of Congress, or anything taht was told to him by a staff member.

    Therefore, he could not clear the record.

    Gruber possibly had no idea why the law really was written the way it was.

    In the law, tax credits were only for exchanges operated by a state. And yet it is true, there were not expected to be any people in the 50 states who were exceptions. Nor was there anything in the law designed to force states to create an exchange, nor did they truly expect every single state to create one.

    I think the key fact is that no money was provided in the law for HHS to operate any non-state exchange.

    I think maybe they wanted the CBO to set a score of zero to the federal government for the administrative expenses of setting and running an exchange, and a score of near zero
    for administrative expenses in general, and they hoped to fix that in the next Congress, but not before.

    Changes in estimates that happen after a law is passed don’t have to be “paid” for.

    Sammy Finkelman (7e7e58)

  30. Gruber – I’m not the only chef who helped create this sh*t sandwich.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  31. gowdy grabs gonads
    glib gruber geek games gomers
    nutty professor

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  32. In teh Sammeh World, surprises are continuous, people are cyphers, intentions are non-existent, chaos reigns.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  33. Gruber – I can’t breathe.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  34. AZ Bob (34bb80) — 12/10/2014 @ 7:10 am

    Just as average PhD, then.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  35. Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 12/10/2014 @ 8:14 am

    I just don’t see Stella going all bananas over him, she had too much class (See: The Ballad of Cable Hogue – her finest work IMHO).

    askeptic (efcf22)

  36. If I was his employer [MIT], I would fire him.

    Denver Todd (64ecb2)

  37. Cable Hogue’s a great movie, askeptic. SS was teh bomb.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  38. Sammy Finkelman,

    This statement is not quite true: “I think the key fact is that no money was provided in the law for HHS to operate any non-state exchange.”

    HHS was required to build a fully-functional internet portal as a model for the States:

    1311(c)(5)(B):
    “[HHS shall] … make available for use by Exchanges a model template for an Internet portal that may be used to direct qualified individuals and qualified employers to qualified health plans, to assist such individuals and employers in determining whether they are eligible to participate in an Exchange or eligible for a premium tax credit or cost sharing reduction, and to present standardized information (including quality ratings) regarding qualified health plans offered through an Exchange to assist consumers in making easy health insurance choices. […] ”

    It was to be funded via the “Health Insurance Reform Implementation Fund” (Section 1005). If, as everyone apparently expected, very few States would decline (or otherwise fail) to establish an exchange, this model exchange would have been the basis for the Federal backups, and the funds in s1005 would have been adequate to the task of whatever scaling up was required.

    Ken Kelly (f754a2)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1069 secs.