WhatFinger

Exposing more lies.

Gruber in 2009: ObamaCare won't be affordable, contains 'no cost controls'

By Robert Laurie ——--December 30, 2014

American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

It was going to control rising costs. It would lower premiums. Your coverage would be better, more comprehensive, and you'd have more options. That was the narrative the President, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid used when they rammed ObamaCare down the throat of an unreceptive nation.
Conservatives always knew it was a lie. Nothing about ObamaCare added up. Even a cursory glance at the law revealed that it would lead to higher premiums, higher deductibles, less choice, and rationed care. You didn't have to "pass it to find out what was in it." The impact of ObamaCare was always inevitable. But still, the left clung to their self-destructive lies like a drowning man with an anvil. Now, a new document shows that the administration knew it was shoveling manure all along. It comes to us via the Daily Caller and it features everyone's favorite ObamaCare architect, Jonathan Gruber.
“The problem is it starts to go hand in hand with the mandate; you can’t mandate insurance that’s not affordable. This is going to be a major issue,” Gruber admitted in an October 2, 2009 lecture, the transcript of which comprised the policy brief. “So what’s different this time? Why are we closer than we’ve ever been before? Because there are no cost controls in these proposals. Because this bill’s about coverage. Which is good! Why should we hold 48 million uninsured people hostage to the fact that we don’t yet know how to control costs in a politically acceptable way? Let’s get the people covered and then let’s do cost control.”

If ObamaCare doesn't control costs, how would the administration justify its B.S. about the ACA's ability to not just control premiums, but lower them?

No cost controls? That's weird; I could have sworn this entire debacle was predicated on the notion that people lacked coverage because it was too expensive. If ObamaCare doesn't control costs, how would the administration justify its B.S. about the ACA's ability to not just control premiums, but lower them? According to Gruber, it would be done by limiting care, denying access to various procedures, and then, making people pay even more.
“The real substance of cost control is all about a single thing: telling patients they can’t have something they want. It’s about telling patients, ‘That surgery doesn’t do any good, so if you want it you have to pay the full cost.’” “There’s no reason the American health care system can’t be, ‘You can have whatever you want, you just have to pay for it.’ That’s what we do in other walks of life. We don’t say everyone has to have a large screen TV. If you want a large screen TV, you have to pay for it. Basically the notion would be to move to a level where everyone has a solid basic insurance level of coverage. Above that people pay on their own, without tax-subsidized dollars, to buy a higher level of coverage.”
Wait, did someone pushing ObamaCare just use the free market as justification for a law based on IRS penalties and forced participation? Amazing. Later, after the law passed, Gruber famously claimed that he wished the pitch to pass ObamaCare could have included a dose of reality. However, he - and the administration he advised - knew the law would never escape Congress if the truth had been admitted. In Gruber's own words, the truth doesn't "sell." The lies did. Had the realities of ObamaCare been openly admitted prior to its passage, the law would have been doomed.

Support Canada Free Press

Donate
Subscribe

View Comments
Robert Laurie——

Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain.com

Be sure to “like” Robert Laurie over on Facebook and follow him on Twitter. You’ll be glad you did.

VIEW Comments

Sponsored