The Keith Hansen opinion on Wednesday, June 5th

had a headline attributed to CNBC: “Two-thirds of uninsured won’t be

able to afford ACA insurance.”

Later, in the article, he wrote

“68 percent of low-income Americans aren’t sure they qualify for tax

credits that would subsidize their cost of health insurance. This

despite the fact that they will, most certainly, qualify.”

This is not what the headline implied.

Are

the headlines meant to mislead those who skim through the paper, but

then the real story is included in smaller type to lay claim to honesty?

The remainder of the opinion article was a good blend of what people believe and what the facts are.

We,

as readers, need to take the time to read, and think, about the

information the media present to us. Incomplete soundbites and

misleading headlines don’t help.

I would like to add to the

opinion’s ending: “In short, it’s cheaper to pay the penalty than

purchase insurance at an inflated rate” … and I would add … although it

is more expensive to pay an unnecessary penalty if you do qualify for

subsidized insurance. Moving from the individual’s situation to

America’s problem with the high cost of medicine, it is definitely more

expensive for all of us since we get to pay when the uninsured go to

the emergency room.

Bob Nelson

Pequot Lakes