Krugman Shoots the Messenger: Blames Wheeler, FDL for Fueling “Fake Scandal” over Gruber

[slipslidingaway]

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/01/11/krugman-shoots-the-messenger-blames-wheeler-fdl-for-“fueling-a-fake-scandal”-over-gruber/

"...While Gruber may have said the exact same thing if he hadn’t been paid by HHS, the White House was inordinately happy with the work he did do. They began furiously promoting his findings as soon as they were out, emphasizing his connection to MIT — but never making mention of the fact that he had been engaged by HHS to do work on their behalf.

November 11, on the White House blog, Jesse Lee wrote a post entitled “Word from the White House: Objective Analysis Shows Reform will Help Small Businesses, Lower Premiums for American Families.” He noted that “MIT economist Jonathan Gruber has a new report out showing that reform will lower premiums for Americans purchasing insurance on their own.” Emphasis on “objective analysis,” no mention that he had been contracted to advise the White House.

On November 28, Nancy Ann-DeParle herself wrote on the White House blog: “MIT Economist Confirms Senate Health Reform Bill Reduces Costs and Improves Coverage.” Emphasis on MIT, no mention of the fact that he was a contractor who was paid to advise her office on just these matters.

On December 3, Kathleen Sebelius herself issued a statement on the Senate bill citing Gruber’s work — but with no mention HHS was paying him.

On December 14, the Executive Office of the President released a paper from the Council of Economic Advisors, which said “Research by Jonathan Gruber finds that even just a single provision – the excise tax – would increase after-tax wages by $234 billion from 2013 to 2019.” It also claimed that “Under the Senate bill, CBO projects no excise tax revenue in 2012 and $30 billion in 2018. CBO and JCT estimate that 81.2 percent of this additional revenue is attributable to higher wages as employers shift compensation from health insurance to wages.” The citation for both was Gruber’s November 20 paper..."

[Hello_Kitty]

1. It's quite simple and I can't see why Krugman doesn't grasp it.

The problem is not with Gruber having a contract or being paid. It's with him being cited as an "independent" expert by the WH and several journalists.

It's also telling that Gruber disclosed his contract in an article he wrote for the New England Journal of Medicine but not in opeds for the NYT and WaPo. Both papers have said that he should have since learning of the contract. But neither could go after him professionally the way that the NEJM could.

[slipslidingaway]

2. Agreed, seems simple to me as well...

thanks for the kick.

[avaistheone1]

20. Critical points.

Gruber clearly was not an "independent" expert.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[laughingliberal]

25. +1000 nt

[ThatPoetGuy]

3. Krugman: "Should Gruber have made a fuller disclosure? Yes"

This would be a real scandal if there were some indication that Gruber's work had been falsified.

This would be a real scandal if Gruber had somehow bent the results.

[slipslidingaway]

7. We may not know if his models are wrong for some time to come...

thinking back to Greenspan's stunning admission.

[Luminous Animal]

4. kick

[berni_mccoy]

5. 2nd article LDF has put out today defending it's b.s. stories against Krugman's call-out

Trying to change the topic from publishing a bogus scandal to covering their ass by saying their right.

LDF is worthless.

[slipslidingaway]

8. And Krugman links to this article by Jonathan Cohn ...

and for me the test is would we have been upset if a Republican administration cited his studies without revealing he was also being paid.

:shrug:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-treatment/massachusetts-jon-gruber-and-related-matters

"...One more thing: I see, from reading other items on this around the web, other journalists writing on health care were not aware that Gruber was doing projections for the administration. Obviously this was not as widely known as I thought, which means that Wheeler deserves credit for publicizing Gruber's work--and that I should be diligent about mentioning it in the future."


MIT Economist Confirms Senate Health Reform Bill Reduces Costs and Improves Coverage
Posted by Nancy-Ann DeParle on November 29, 2009 at 03:14 PM EST

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/11/29/mit-economist-confirms-senate-health-reform-bill-reduces-costs-and-improves-coverage

http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=site%3Awhitehouse.gov+jonathan+gruber

[berni_mccoy]

11. And FDL has been making shit up, sensationalizing issues, and on a witch hunt, so which is worse?

They still claim Harry Reid said he had the votes to pass a PO and he never did. That's still up on the top of their "War Room" page: http://action.firedoglake.com/page/content/warroom/

Hamsher still believes Norquist is her buddy and is enlisting teabaggers. Go read some of the teabagger blogs over at FDL. It's simply a hatefest over there and that place has become FR2.

[slipslidingaway]

13. You forgot to address this issue ...

for me the test is would we have been upset if a Republican administration cited his studies without revealing he was also being paid.

[berni_mccoy]

14. It's not my issue, it's FDL. They're the ones going after Krugman. They need to make their case

and they're the ones avoiding the issue. The issue is, FDL is just making shit up and Krugman called them on it. That's what the issue is and they don't like it.

[slipslidingaway]

16. Maybe it should be everyone's issue, do you hold people to the same standards...

regardless of party affiliation.

:shrug:

[berni_mccoy]

18. Then FDL has a whole lotta work to do to come up to it's own standards.

[slipslidingaway]

21. As I posted above, Krugman even links to a piece which states ...

Cohn ...

"One more thing: I see, from reading other items on this around the web, other journalists writing on health care were not aware that Gruber was doing projections for the administration. Obviously this was not as widely known as I thought, which means that Wheeler deserves credit for publicizing Gruber's work--and that I should be diligent about mentioning it in the future."

Krugman ...

"What the folks at Firedoglake should ask themselves is this: do you really want to become just like the right-wingers with their endless supply of fake scandals?"

Instead of leveling a charge against Wheeler and FDL for Fake scandals, maybe Krugman should step back rethink his accusation.

:shrug:


And there is no mention by Krugman or you about slinkerwink's diary at Daily Kos - either you call everyone out or not.

Same standards for everyone or not, seems like an easy question.

And yes I think people in the administration should also have disclosed the fact he was being paid for his model, we would have expected this from a Republican administration and we should expect it from our own party.

[ProfessorGAC]

23. Learn A New Song

You keep saying there is just one simple question. In fact, the issue is too complex for there to be one simple question that resolves all.

You are acting suspiciously two dimensional on this issue.

Two dimensional thinking is something we experienced greatly from 1994 to 2008. (And still do, on Faux.) I've had more than enough of it.
GAC

[slipslidingaway]

24. Too many are willing to look the other way because someone has a D ...

after their name and IMO that will not produce the best results for our country.

Sure someone can vary slightly on what standards are acceptable, but when people do almost a complete turn around they are open to criticism.


Another example where many people have looked the other way ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=420430&mesg_id=420457

Candidate Obama ...

"And we are tired of watching as year after year, candidates offer up detailed health care plans with great fanfare and promise only to see them crushed under the weight of Washington politics and drug and insurance lobbying once the campaign is over.

That is not who we are, that is not who we have to be, enough is enough, it time for us to change."

[WyLoochka]

28. Won't give them the hits anymore

so won't go there. Haven't gone there much since Christy Hardin Smith retired from the site anyway. Guess all I'm missing is some hysteria and a bunch of bad judgment calls by Hamsher etal.

[dionysus]

10. and they said we "threw krugman under the bus"

:rofl:

[berni_mccoy]

17. I know. I just can't get over how they've gone after Krugman who made one statement

on this. The disproportionate reaction is certainly telling.

[Luminous Animal]

6. It looks like FireDogLake has taken over the NY Times.

EDITORS' NOTE
On July 12, the Op-Ed page published an article by Jonathan Gruber, a professor of economics at M.I.T., on health insurance and taxation. On Friday, Professor Gruber confirmed reports that he is a paid consultant to the Department of Health and Human Services, and that his contract was in effect when he published his article. The article did not disclose this relationship to readers.

Like other writers for the Op-Ed page, Professor Gruber signed a contract that obligated him to tell editors of such a relationship. Had editors been aware of Professor Gruber’s government ties, the Op-Ed page would have insisted on disclosure or not published his article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/pageoneplus/corrections.html

[slipslidingaway]

9. Yes, many are now realizing that this should have been disclosed...

thanks for the kicks.

:)

[laughingliberal]

26. Well, that's a little inconvenient for the apologists, isn't it? nt

[bvar22]

29. OUCH*****

THAT is going to leave a mark on those attacking Hamshire & FDL.

It DOES matter if someone (Gruber) is On the Payroll!!!

[librechik]

12. I guess some folks are just too committed to trashing FDL

otherwise they would welcome this story. I'm sick of some of the Hamsher Haters on this site--scared a girlzzz?

I'm just guessing. If so, they are repulsive. The excuses they use to justify the hate are craven and trivial. We make more progress when we move in a positive direction instead of the Atwood like politics of hate and smear.

[slipslidingaway]

15. Sure looks that way, FDL spent thousands of hours working for ...

the public option and the HC reform bill, now that they have backed off, people will look for any reason to trash them.

[trumad]

19. well---

If you can't admit the Grover Norchrist thing wasn't a total boneheaded move.... then you and the others up above are morans.

[slipslidingaway]

22. So that was about Fannie, Freddie and Emanuel ...

looking over the links there are more people who should be targeted as they have also joined with Norquist on specific issue.

http://firedoglake.com/2009/12/23/why-i-reached-out-to-grover-norquist-on-fanniefreddie/

"I guess Kevin wasn’t around two weeks ago when Campaign for America’s Future put together a letter seeking to stop Ben Bernanke from being confirmed until the Fed had been audited...

Or nine long days ago, when CAF circulated another letter opposing Bernanke’s confirmation, signed by Dean Baker, Bob Borosage, David Swanson and…Grover Norquist.

You collect signatures on letters like these to get media traction, to build pressure so someone has to take action. Kevin apparently didn’t read our letter — it’s about a bailout of Fannie/Freddie that they’re trying to jam through before the end of the year, nothing to do with health care. He also apparently slept through the past nine years when people on the right like Bob Barr, Grover Norquist and Bruce Fein were cosigning letters with ACLU civil libertarians all the time when it came to FISA, domestic spying and transparency. It was hard for them to do, because Bush sycophants dismissed them as “traitors” to the president.

For those with short memories: Here’s Wes Clarke, Mort Halperin, John Dean, John Podesta, Grover Norquist, Bruce Fein and Bob Barr on the Liberty and Security Protection Committee of the Constitution Project..."

http://firedoglake.com/2009/12/23/jane-hamsher-grover-norquist-call-for-rahm-emmanuel%E2%80%99s-resignation/

"We write to demand an immediate investigation into the activities of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel..."

[laughingliberal]

27. Oh, look! Moveon posted a quote from Washington Post in Dec '05 where Norquist opposed Bush's

violation of the FISA laws. Under the bus they go with the rest of us.

Washington Post, Dec 17, 2005

GROVER NORQUIST

Referring to what some see as a conflict between fighting vicious terrorists and upholding all civil liberties, Norquist said: “It’s not either/or. If the president thinks he needs different tools, pass a law to get them. Don’t break the existing law."

https://political.moveon.org/archive/breakingthelaw_sub1.html

Huh, if I didn't know that quote was from Noquist would I be forced to agree with the priciple? Ok, carry on...

[slipslidingaway]

32. Funny how only certain people get hit for their associations :) n/t

[bvar22]

30. K&R....Back UP to +1

Some conservative DUers who support the current HCR Bill have spamed DU with Gruber's stuff.


It DOES matter if Gruber was On the Payroll!!!

[slipslidingaway]

31. Thanks and in case you missed this interview with Gruber and Bivens ...

Bivens from the EPI.

video and text
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june10/cadillac_01-11.html

"Transcript
GWEN IFILL: That follows our debate over taxing high-cost insurance plans.

Senate and House Democrats who are hashing out the differences between their health care reform bills behind closed doors have a major disagreement on their hands: how to pay for it. Should high-value insurance plans be taxed, or should high-income households pay the price?

The Senate proposal, which President Obama supports, would raise about $150 billion over six years. The money would come from imposing an excise tax of 40 percent on the portion of any policy that costs more than $8,500 for individuals or $23,000 for families. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that would affect one in five workers by 2016. The White House and some economists argue this approach would rein in health care spending by discouraging excessive insurance coverage..."