Posted by Rob Roper
Recently released emails between Jonathan Gruber and top Shumlin administration officials reinforce the suspicion that the MIT professor cannot be an impartial judge of whether or not the financing system for Green Mountain Care is feasible.
Critics of Gruber, such as the Ethan Allen Institute, believed that a statement made by Gruber in captured video in which he admitted participating in misleading the American voters about the Affordable Care Act because, “I would rather have this law than not,” made it difficult to trust any conclusions he might make about GMC.
On December 7, the Times Argus reported on the new emails that have come to light:
In a July 7 email to Michael Costa, Shumlin’s deputy director of health reform and the tax expert spearheading the administration’s financing plan, Gruber expressed unbridled enthusiasm at the opportunity to help the state craft a single-payer health care plan.
“[T]hat was an AWESOME call. Thanks so much for making the time. I am really excited to work with you all — I think we have the chance to really make history here.”
So would Gruber mislead Vermont voters because he’d rather make history than not? With over $2 billion at stake, we have to assume the answer is yes. He is clearly not an impartial arbiter, but an enthusiastic advocate. This disqualifies him for the job he has been hired to do.
– Rob Roper is president of the Ethan Allen Institute
{ 0 comments… add one now }
{ 1 trackback }