Fox News Hypes ACA Prices, Uses Right-Wing Lobbyist As Proof Law Sucks!

 While every other media outlet is reporting on the government shut down, Fox News has not lost their anti-Obama focus and have been headlining story after story about the evils of the Affordable Care Act.  Their most recent article claims the law has caused a spike in premiums all across the nation using as proof anonymous stories from conservative legislators reading notes from "Phil" and "Mike," but their lead-in account regarded a family man by the name of Andy Mangione.  What Fox News doesn't tell you is that Mangione is a small government conservative lobbyist who has worked for giant pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, Inc., Invacare Corporation, and Humana Inc.

"Andy Mangione, who lives in Louisville, Ky. with his wife Amy and their two boys," reads the Fox News article, "is doing the same thing millions of people are doing --trying to figure out how much his insurance will cost under ObamaCare."

This account of course comes from a blog post family man Andy made on the AMAC website.

What is the AMAC?

The AMAC, or Association of Mature American Citizens, claims to be the "conservative alternative to the AARP" and believes that the "present system of State regulations and free enterprise has proven satisfactory for over 85% of our citizens" in providing health care.  Presumably they come to that figure by citing United States Census Bureau statistics that show roughly 15% of Americans, or 48.6 million people, lack health insurance.  Do you think those 48.6 million people are uninsured because they are satisfied with the current system?

In Mangione's blog post he insists that his family premium would more then double under the health care law and provides a link to a document that alleges to prove the health care law will put his family into financial ruin.  The problem with that is if you actually click on the link and read the letter Mangione received it states that he could pick one of two options.

Option A is his current policy, which costs $333.65, and Option B, which costs $965.07, but as the Fox News article states, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation site, Mangione could be eligible for a $414 monthly subsidy bringing Option B to $551.07.  That would be a 65% increase in premiums but the two policies differ slightly with Option B having a lower deductible, lower out-of-pocket coinsurance, essential health benefits, and children's dental.

So in reality, Mangione's premiums did not skyrocket - they would either stay the same if Option A is chosen or they would raise 65% with Option B, but Mangione would receive greater coverage and less upfront costs (typically the premiums are higher when the deductible is lower, and there is a $5300 difference between the two policies family deductible).  And as the letter states, if Option A is chosen, come the end of 2014 new ACA compliant options will be made available, giving Mangione time to prepare and decide what choice is best for his family.

Here was the title of Andy's blog post:

Now considering the facts would you say that headline is accurate or extremely disingenuous?