Video Surfaces Showing Obamacare Architect Taking Conservative View Of Subsidies

FILE - In this May 12, 2009, file photo Jonathan Gruber, professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, participates in a Capitol Hill hearing on the overhaul of the heath care system in Washing... FILE - In this May 12, 2009, file photo Jonathan Gruber, professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, participates in a Capitol Hill hearing on the overhaul of the heath care system in Washington. A supporter of the Affordable Care Act, Gruber says, "It’s so crazy to think that a society that has Social Security and Medicare would not find this (law) constitutional.” Gruber advised both the Obama administration and Massachusetts lawmakers as they developed the state mandate in the 2006 law that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney championed as governor. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

An online video has surfaced in which MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, one of the top outside experts consulted during Obamacare’s drafting, appears to endorse the view advanced by conservatives that the law’s tax credits would not be available for people using HealthCare.gov.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, published the video on Thursday evening. The organization said it was shot at a January 2012 event hosted by Noblis, a non-profit research group, at which Gruber spoke.

During a Q&A session, Gruber was asked in the video about Obamacare’s health insurance exchanges. He said he thought the federal government “wants to squeeze the states” to set up their own exchanges by being slow to develop the federal website, which would be the back-stop for any state that didn’t establish one. He then moved onto the tax-credit issue.

“What’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t 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,” he said in the video. “So you’re essentially saying to your citizens you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country. I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges and that they’ll do it. But, you know, once again the politics can get ugly around this.”

It is not clear what Gruber’s rationale would have been for taking this position at the time, and he did not immediately respond to TPM’s request for comment on Friday. The final Internal Revenue Service rule covering the tax credits was released in May 2012, several months after Gruber spoke in the video.

A federal appeals court ruled earlier this week that, based on Obamacare’s language, tax credits should not be available to people who use HealthCare.gov. Another appeals court ruled the opposite way on the same day. The issue could be heading to the Supreme Court. If tax credits were invalidated for the federal exchange, it could affect nearly 5 million people in the 36 states using the website and send premiums skyrocketing.

The health policy world was quickly consumed by the Gruber video, and conservatives seized on it as supporting evidence that the tax credits should not be allowed for those shopping on HealthCare.gov and that this was Congress’s intent all along.

“Gruber is not a member of Congress, so this isn’t direct evidence that Congress intended to offer tax credits only in state-established Exchanges,” the Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon, a major force behind the lawsuit, wrote. “But he may be the next best thing.”

Others who followed Obamacare from its early days seemed perplexed by Gruber’s comments in the video.

While Gruber’s is not the final word on congressional intent, he was intimately involved in helping to draft the law. The New York Times reported in 2012 that he worked closely with the White House and congressional staff while the bill was being developed.

More recently, though, Gruber has dismissed the current lawsuit challenging the tax credits on HealthCare.gov.

“It is unambiguous this is a typo. Literally every single person involved in the crafting of this law has said that it’s a typo, that they had no intention of excluding the federal states. And why would they?” Gruber said this week on MSNBC. “Why would Congress set up the mandate and go through all that political battle to allow it to be destroyed? It’s just simply a typo, and it’s really criminal that this has even made it as far as it has.”

Latest DC
18
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Yes, a LITTLE weird, but it was never a secret that the plan was to have the states do the exchanges. The Fed exchange was only there as a back-up as Gruber says. So yes, not granting tax credits to folks who sign up with the Fed is a way–sort of–of squeezing the states to do it. But a very ineffective way.

    For one, the assumption was never that the states would simply refuse to set up an exchange in order to sink the law, even at the risk of screwing their people out of a tax credit and, more importantly, coverage. If state leaders don’t care, then they are unlikely to feel this pressure.

    And the average person is so out of it that he’s unlikely to know or care that folks in a neighboring state are getting a tax credit he’s not getting–and thus put pressure on his state to get with the program. His biggest concern is getting insured at a reasonable price. And it would be cruel for the Feds to withhold coverage because a state refused to set up an exchange for political reasons. And the whole thing doesn’t work for a lot of people UNLESS they get a tax credit.

  2. Okay, another misleading take on this. Sure, Gruber brings up the issue of tax subsidies, but the point he was making is that it puts pressure on states to make the tax credits available to their citizens. It you want to take this as an endorsement of the recent SCOTUS decisions, then you enjoy stretching your arguments whisper thin. That kind of distortion is best left to the fascists on the right.

  3. The whole PP&ACA appears to be “just a typo”.

    Basically Congress was attempting to force the States into running the exchanges, buying them off with tax credits. Tax credits are also unavailable to territories like Puerto Rico and States that did not have their exchange operating by a certain date. They tried the same thing with the expansion of Medicare by denying any Medicare funds to States that did not expand.

    Congress was using the citizens of the States, knowing full well that the subsidies will decrease over time and the States will be left holding the expense.

  4. “I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality…”

    In these times, the laws of political reality have been revoked. So what would normally work–say, pressure from the center–no longer works. Bagger Nation simply doesn’t care.

  5. No. The STATES are using their citizens and screwing them.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

12 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for peter_schwartz Avatar for earlgreyparty Avatar for learning Avatar for arrrrrj Avatar for FlameCCT Avatar for carlosfiance Avatar for 538liberal

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: