Gruber Much Greater in ACA, King v. Burwell Decision Looms

Editor’s Note – As the Supreme Court gets set to hand down its ruling in the King v. Burwell case concerning subsidies for Obamacare in states without their own exchanges, much consternation has gripped Washington, D.C. The ruling could came any day now.

The case here isn’t about the law in general, it’s about the specific question of whether tax credits, or subsidies, offered on federally-established exchanges are legal under Obamacare. The law allowed states to establish their own insurance exchanges or to let the federal government do it for them using the HealthCare.gov exchange.

Obamacare Faces Its Own Death Panel Before Supreme Court… And It's Losing (Gateway Pundit)
Obamacare Faces Its Own Death Panel Before Supreme Court… And It’s Losing (Gateway Pundit)

The plaintiffs argue that four words in the tax section of the law, “established by the state,” indicate that Congress intended for subsidies to be received only by enrollees on state exchanges, and that the law should be read as it is written.

The defendants argue that the law should be read in its entirety, in which case it is clear that subsidies are offered on all exchanges, and that was the authors’ intent all along. (Read more here at the National Journal.)

Obama and the left are already blaming the Republicans if the court rules against them and they do not have a back-up plan, nor do we think they want one so they can once again inflict heavy damage to families as they did when it was implemented.

The thought is that the blame will rest squarely on Congress and the “stupid American voter” will once again be relied upon to believe them.

Days before the Supreme Court could strip it of a central component, there is still no “plan B” for Obamacare. Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell warned the Obama administration will be unable to cover the millions of Americans who could lose their medical insurance if the Supreme Court decides to unravel much of the Affordable Care Act.

“We don’t believe there is an administration solution that would undo all of that damage,” Burwell said about the looming Supreme Court ruling in an exclusive interview with CNN. (Read more here.)

But we must remind people – the law was shoved down our throats as Democrats alone voted it into law and signed by Obama. Now we are finding out that it is much worse than we knew – it appears our friend; Jonathan Gruber, he of the “stupid” statements and “smug filled rooms” was much more integral in the design of ObamaCare from the beginning.

Please remind all you speak with of this fact as the left blames the right for people losing their subsidies and not being able to afford what was supposed to be less expensive – remember the full name of the law; the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – PPACA.

Controversial MIT economist Jonathan Gruber reportedly played key role in ObamaCare law

By xxx – Fox News

MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, who claimed the authors of ObamaCare took advantage of what he called the “stupidity of the American voter,” played a much bigger role in the law’s drafting than previously acknowledged, according to a published report.

The Wall Street Journal, citing 20,000 pages of emails sent by Gruber between January 2009 and March 2010, reported Sunday that Gruber was frequently consulted by staffers and advisers for both the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) about the Affordable Care Act.Gruber Gate

Among the topics that Gruber discusses in the emails are media interviews, consultations with lawmakers, and even how to publicly describe his role.

The emails were released as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on the legality of federal health insurance exchange subsidies.

The Journal reports that the officials Gruber contacted by e-mail included Peter Orszag, then the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); Jason Furman, an economic adviser to the president; and Ezekiel Emanuel, then a special adviser for health policy at OMB.

“His proximity to HHS and the White House was a whole lot tighter than they admitted,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R- Utah, chairman of the House oversight committee, told the Journal. “There’s no doubt he was a much more integral part of this than they’ve said. He put up this facade he was an arm’s length away. It was a farce.”

States to be affected by the King v. Burwell case (Courtesy of KFF.org)
States to be affected by the King v. Burwell case (Courtesy of KFF.org)

“As has been previously reported, Mr. Gruber was a widely used economic modeler for administrations and state governments run by both parties—both before and after the Affordable Care Act was passed,” HHS spokeswoman Meaghan Smith told the Journal in a statement. “These emails only echo old news.”

Gruber became the center of a political storm in November 2014, when a video surfaced of him taking part in a 2013 panel discussion about ObamaCare. At one point, Gruber said the Obama administration wrote the bill “in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes.

pol_obamacare32__01__630x420If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies … Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.”

At the time of the controversy, President Obama referred to Gruber as “some adviser who never worked on our staff.” However, the Journal reports that Gruber’s emails appear to reference at least one meeting with Obama.

Furthermore, one email from Jeanne Lambrew, a top Obama health adviser, thanks Gruber for “being an integral part of getting us to this historic moment”, while another message from Lambrew refers to Gruber as “our hero.”

Fox News previously reported that HHS retained Gruber in March 2009 on a $95,000 contract to produce “a series of technical memoranda on the estimated changes in health insurance coverage and associated costs and impacts to the government under alternative specifications of health system reform.” A second contract with HHS three months later saw Gruber receive an additional $297,600.

Gruber later apologized for his comments in a December 2014 hearing before the House Oversight Committee, calling the remarks “mean and insulting.”