Obama administration consultant’s ‘stupidity of American voter’ comment roils Obamacare debate |

Obama administration consultant’s ‘stupidity of American voter’ comment roils Obamacare debate

WASHINGTON — Economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the Obama administration’s consultants on the Affordable Care Act, is under attack from conservatives for comments he made last year in which he said the “stupidity of the American voter” was a factor in passing Obamacare in 2010.

The comments were made during the panel sessions at the Annual Health Economics Conference. A video of the panel began circulating Monday among conservative media.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes,” he said during a panel discussion at the University of Pennsylvania in October 2013. “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 to getting the thing to pass.”

Gruber’s comments were part of a broader public conversation between him and economist Mark Pauly on the economics of health care reform. Gruber was responding to a remark by Pauly about financing transparency in the law and the politics surrounding the ACA’s individual mandate. The political process, he said, striking a critical tone, resulted in inefficiencies in the law that should be corrected.

“In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which explicitly said that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed,” he said. “You can’t do it politically, you just literally cannot do it. It’s not only transparent financing but also transparent spending.”

Conservatives tore into Gruber’s 2013 remarks, saying they served as an admission of intentional deceit by the Affordable Care Act’s architects.

“There you go, America. That is what the Democrat Party thinks of you,” Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show Monday, according to a transcript of the show. “They think most people are incompetent and will make the wrong decisions if living a life of self-reliance.”

Social media lit up with posts about the comments Monday and Tuesday, with several lawmakers weighing in.

Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-La., who is challenging Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, in a Senate runoff election next month, seized on the comments to ding his Democratic rival. “The architect of Obamacare says it passed because voters are stupid. Does Landrieu think that about #LAsen voters?” he wrote on twitter.

In the video, Gruber appeared to be speaking specifically about the political environment in 2010 and its impact on the law’s funding mechanisms. Gruber takes a critical stance on some of those outcomes, calling them “irrational.”

“I wish Mark was right and we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not,” Gruber said. “That involves tradeoffs that we don’t prefer as economists but are realistic.”

Tuesday, independent Sen. Angus King, Maine, who caucuses with the Democrats, had a tense exchange with Fox News anchor Brian Kilmeade on air.

“I certainly don’t endorse those kind of comments. But I can recall that debate. I wasn’t in office. It was a very vigorous debate,” King said when asked about Gruber’s comments. “Everybody knew that there were going to be additional taxes required to support the premiums under the Affordable Care Act. I don’t see it as any deep, dark conspiracy.”

“Really? He said he wasn’t transparent. Senator, he said he wasn’t transparent,” Kilmeade pushed back, beginning a tense exchange with the senator.

“We’ve got 8 million people that have insurance now that didn’t before. And don’t lecture me about this. Because 40 years ago, I had insurance. If I hadn’t had it — it caught a cancer that saved my life,” King said.

Gruber apologized for his comments Tuesday during an interview with MSNBC’s Ronan Farrow.

“The comments in the video were made at an academic conference,” Gruber said. “I was speaking off the cuff, and I basically spoke inappropriately, and I regret having made those comments.”

Although Gruber apologized for the language he used, Gruber said that the larger point he was trying to make centered on the political pressures that shaped the law. He added that those pressures “led to an incomplete law with some typos.”

“It would have made more sense to do Obamacare the way we did in Massachusetts, which would be to just give people money to offset the cost of their health insurance,” Gruber said. “That was politically infeasible, and so instead, it was done through the tax code.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.