Charles Blahous

Visiting Fellow

Charles Blahous is a Hoover visiting fellow specializing in domestic economic policy. His areas of expertise include retirement security, with an emphasis on Social Security and employer-provided defined benefit pensions, as well as federal fiscal policy, entitlements, demographic change, economic stimulus, financial market regulation, and health care reform.

From 2010 to 2015, Blahous served as one of the two public trustees for the Social Security and Medicare Programs. From 2007 to 2009, he served as deputy director of President Bush's National Economic Council. From 2001 to 2007, Blahous served as a special assistant to the president for economic policy, first covering retirement security issues and later encompassing energy policy. In 2001, he served as the executive director of the bipartisan President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security.

From 2000 to 2001, Blahous led the Alliance for Worker Retirement Security, a private-sector coalition dedicated to the fiscally responsible reform of Social Security. From 1996 to 2000, he served as policy director for US senator Judd Gregg (R-NH). From 1989 to 1996, he served in the office of Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY), first as a Congressional Science Fellow sponsored by the American Physical Society and, from 1994 to 1996, as the senator's legislative director.

Blahous’s latest publications include Social Security: The Unfinished Work (Hoover Press, 2010) and Pension Wise: Confronting Employer Pension Underfunding—and Sparing Taxpayers the Next Bailout (Hoover Press, 2010). He is also the author of Reforming Social Security. He has published in a number of periodicals including National Affairs, Financial Times, Politico, National Review, Harvard Journal of Legislation, Baseball Research Journal, and the Journal of Chemical Physics. He was named to SmartMoney's "Power 30" list in 2005. His public appearances include various radio and television programs including "Ask the White House," and speeches on university and college campuses.

Blahous has a PhD in computational quantum chemistry from the University of California at Berkeley and an AB from Princeton University, where he won the McKay Prize in Physical Chemistry.

Filter By:



Recent Commentary


The Guy Benson Show Goes To Stanford University: Broadcasting LIVE From The Hoover Institution

interview with Michael McFaul, Victor Davis Hanson, Charles Blahous, Bill Whalen, Scott W. Atlas, Abbas Milani, John B. Taylorvia The Guy Benson Show
Saturday, December 7, 2019

Hoover Institution fellows Michael McFaul, Victor Davis Hanson, Charles Blahous, Bill Whalen, Scott Atlas, Abbas Milani, and John Taylor are interviewed on the Guy Benson Show.

InterviewsHealth Care

Charles Blahous: Top Expert On Warren Healthcare Plan: I Was Incredulous, It Was A “Mirage”

interview with Charles Blahousvia Fox News
Tuesday, November 19, 2019

Hoover Institution fellow Charles Blahous discusses Elizabeth Warren's proposal to ostensibly pay for the costs of Medicare for All without raising taxes on the middle class. 

Analysis and CommentaryHealth Care

Blahous: There’s Still No Plan To Finance ‘Medicare For All’

by Charles Blahousvia Pantagraph
Saturday, November 9, 2019

On Nov. 1, presidential candidate and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., announced a proposal billed as a financing plan for “Medicare for All.” Unfortunately, it does not even acknowledge, let alone finance, the costs of Medicare for All.

In the News

Ilhan Omar Claims The U.S. ‘Can Afford Medicare For All’

quoting Charles Blahousvia Breitbart
Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Far-left “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) dismissed concerns of the overall cost of implementing a government-run healthcare system in the United States, stating “we can afford Medicare for All.”

In the News

How Long Can Sen. Warren Dodge Questions About Medicare For All?

quoting Charles Blahousvia Forbes
Tuesday, October 15, 2019

Presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren won't answer a simple question about the healthcare plan she endorses, Medicare for All. Will it raise taxes on middle-class families?

Blank Section (Placeholder)

Scrub This Fantasy

by Charles Blahousvia Hoover Digest
Wednesday, October 9, 2019

“Medicare for all” is a prescription for fresh inefficiencies and stratospheric costs. We couldn’t afford it—and we shouldn’t even want it.


The Fallacies Underlying The Warren Social Security Plan

by Charles Blahousvia Economics 21
Monday, October 7, 2019

Elizabeth Warren, U.S. senator from Massachusetts and candidate for president, recently released a Social Security plan that would exacerbate many of the program’s existing problems while also creating several new ones. The plan was announced in an article she posted on Medium, along with an analysis authored by Moody’s Analytics’ Marc Zandi.

Analysis and Commentary

What Medicare For All Would Mean For Us All

by Charles Blahousvia The Ripon Society Mission
Tuesday, September 17, 2019

Among the hottest topics of this political season is “Medicare for All” (M4A), a concept embraced by several current candidates for president, and criticized by others. M4A is one of the most consequential policy ideas ever put before the American electorate, and it is vital that we understand exactly what it is, what it isn’t, and what its implications would be.

In the News

Social Security 2100 Act

quoting Charles Blahousvia Imperial Valley News
Tuesday, August 6, 2019

Washington, DC - Social Security and its solvency have long been a top concern for AMAC – Association of Mature American Citizens [AMAC] and its nearly 2 million members. Long thought of as a political “third rail,” it is encouraging to see politicians in Washington attempting to address Social Security’s financial viability. Representative John Larson (D–Conn) has put forth “Social Security 2100 Act,” a comprehensive bill designed to strengthen the benefit for years.

Analysis and Commentary

Dem Debates Reveal Fundamental Divide: Should Gov’t Nurture Economy Or Displace It Altogether?

by Charles Blahousvia CNS News
Friday, August 2, 2019

One exchange from the first debate in Detroit this week between Democratic Party presidential candidates has already received substantial airplay. Its deeper significance warrants further exploration.