index

The architect of Obamacare Jonathan Gruber will testify before the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday, which will only add to heightened scrutiny over the highly controversial health care law.

Jonathan Gruber, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, initiated a firestorm of a controversy when videos surfaced of him stating a “lack of transparency” aided the passage of the law and “stupidity of the American voter” enabled Obamacare to pass.

The Hill reported Gruber, who has apologized for his remarks, will now discuss them in one of Rep. Darrell Issa’s (R-Calif.) final hearings as Oversight Committee chairman. The event is expected to draw significant attention from Republicans, and will put Democrats on the spot as they seek to distance themselves from Gruber.

The Hill continued to report that also testifying before the committee will be the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Marilyn Tavenner will also attend as a witness. She’s likely to get questions about the administration’s inflated ObamaCare numbers, which Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell has vowed to correct.

The testimony of Gruber places the president and Democrats in a difficult position as the videos have shown what many have suspected all along.

Gruber will now have to explain what he meant while speaking at the Pioneer Institute in Boston in March of 2011, while discussing the Cadillac tax on high end health insurance plan, which impacts unions across the country.

“The only way we could take it on was first by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people when we all know it’s really a tax on people who hold those insurance plans.”

In a critical case before the Supreme Court, Gruber spoke in January 2012 at Noblis Inc. in Falls Church, Virginia, as Politico reported how he indicated  that Obamacare subsidies would not flow to residents of states that don¹t set up their own exchange, ­ contrary to the administration’s argument in a critical case heading to the Supreme Court next year.

“If you’re a state and you don¹t set up an exchange that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits. But your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill.”

Then in October 2012, Gruber speaking before the Honors Colloquium of the University of Rhode Island in Kingston detailed how a tax on insurance coverage will directly impact consumers and then explained why this will happen.

“We just tax the insurance companies; they pass it on in higher prices that offsets the tax break we get. …It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter.”

The real veracity of his comments came while speaking as an expert panelist at the   University of Pennsylvania, on Oct 17, 2013, which gave the real interpretation of how the health care law was crafted and passed.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. … Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. … Call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

The outspoken nature of Gruber’s remarks has many Democrats running away as fast as possible from Gruber himself and the healthcare law itself.

New York Senator Chuck Schumer speaking at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. last month stated, “After passing the stimulus, Democrats should have continued to propose middle-class-oriented programs and built on the partial success of the stimulus, but unfortunately Democrats blew the opportunity the American people gave them,” Schumer said. “We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem—health care reform.”

The National Journal reported the third-ranking Senate Democrat noted that just about 5 percent of registered voters in the United States lacked health insurance before the implementation of the law, arguing that to focus on a problem affecting such “a small percentage of the electoral made no political sense.”

The larger problem, affecting most Americans, he said, was a poor economy resulting from the recession. “When Democrats focused on health care, the average middle-class person thought, ‘The Democrats aren’t paying enough attention to me,’ ” Schumer said.

Schumer continued, “People thought—and I understand this—lots of people thought this was the only time to do this, it’s very important to do. And we should have done it. We just shouldn’t have done it first,” he said. “We were in the middle of a recession. People were hurting and saying, ‘What about me? I’m losing my job. It’s not health care that bothers me. What about me?’ … About 85 percent of all Americans were fine with their health care in 2009, mainly because it was paid for by either the government or their employer, private sector. So they weren’t clamoring. The average middle-class voter, they weren’t opposed to doing health care when it started out, but it wasn’t at the top of the agenda.”

The fallout on Obamacare will continue as individuals will see on average a 15% increase in health care premiums and next year begins the individual and employer mandates.

The comments could not have come at a worst possible time for the president and Democrats.

Tomorrow’s testimony will be interesting!