Should Smokers Have to Pay More for Health Insurance?

No, says an unlikely pairing of big tobacco and anti-cancer activists

Two unlikely allies, big tobacco companies and anti-cancer activists, have united to oppose a measure in the Obamacare health law that targets smokers. Starting in 2014, the law lets health insurance companies charge smokers up to 50 percent more than nonsmokers.

Health insurance companies have supported the provision, saying smokers should pay more to cover their additional health-care costs or else rates for everyone would go up.

But cigarette makers say the policy discriminates against smokers. The American Cancer Society argues that the higher cost could make health insurance unaffordable to cigarette smokers, who are disproportionately low income.

"We're anti-smoking, not anti-smoker," said David Woodmansee, the group's associate director for state and local campaigns.

Since Congress already approved the measure over their objections, opponents are now turning their attention to the states, which have the authority to prevent insurance companies from charging more to smokers, the Washington Post reports.

Via the Washington Post

Should smokers have to pay more for health insurance?

[DerivePI]

"Translation for Dummies" - Should you be responsible for the choices you make?

[Fishbone345]

Exactly! And people unhealthy because of weight are in the same league.
I shouldn't have to eat their rising costs.

[Zazziness]

@Fishbone345 If I had a chart that told me every action you took over the course of a week and perhaps a breakdown of any illnesses you are genetically predisposed to, I guarantee you I could find flaws enough to justify charging you more for your insurance. The same could be said of *anyone.* Being alive is risky.
Yes, smoking is horribly unhealthy. Yes, obesity is, too. People with unhealthy habits to change need to be consulting with their doctor on a regular basis. Why would we then choose to withhold medical care from those folks? That doesn't make sense. It's impractical.
We pool our resources and we share the services.

[Fishbone345]

@Zazziness Nice theory, very PC and loving, too bad it doesn't pay the bills. Fact is, costs are soaring ever higher, due directly to people who are obese. It's way more than people think it is. New beds, surgical tools, wheelchairs, dressings, medications, people on duty.
I choose not to subject myself to diabetes, I shouldn't have to suck it up for those who do.

[NavinRJohnson]

I have a blood disease I didn't choose and I can't get insurance because of it. That not right.

[Litdes]

Of course, insurance is risk management, and smoking poses a greater liability.

[martydotcom]

non smokers get a discount - this verbiage is a more palatable way of selling the concept
Non obese should also get a discount
alcohol use too difficult to monitor

[harold_lloyd]

Your concept of risk management is superficial.

If you split the general population into sub-groups, you could make a case for it, but then you'd have to admit that all sorts of behaviors change the risk profile of any identifiable sub-group.

Skydivers, drinkers, aggressive drivers, farmers, miners, policemen, they all present a higher risk profile than the population as a whole.

Where do you stop once you start down this path?

[dances-weebles]

that is the insurance company's problem. they are making the gamble that the insured isn't going to get sick or die, then they have to take the odds... no matter what.

[Litdes]

@harold_lloyd Of course, none of the occupations you list has as consistently a high risk as smoking.

[AceLuby]

Our company already charges a surcharge for smokers and I have no issue with that. If you don't like to pay the higher premiums, quit smoking. Unfortunately I think this will ultimately end up a money grab by the insurance companies and won't help ease the burden for those of us who make healthier choices.

[crusader]

Possibly but what about other health risks. Such as overweight, high stress jobs, poor eating habits, alcoholic and etc, etc.

[Yank]

Smoking (and smokers) has been demonized to the point where people are willing to over look such discrepancies. The obese cost far more then smokers.

[martydotcom]

@Yank I don't know anyone willing to overlook smokers - by and large they are ostracized wherever you go to a cigar bar. Locally, our Town Counsel is debating a ban at public beaches. No one want the intrusion of the smell of smoke

[Yank]

@martydotcom I didn't say smokers were overlooked, I said smoking/smokers are demonized and other preventable activities that cost as much or more than smoking are over looked.

[HooverNiebold]

@martydotcom

You mention cigar bars. Perhaps you should also look up the facts about cigar smokers. High life expectancy, better health longer in life, less stress, and low cholesterol.

[jessejaymes]

I don't smoke tobacco and I don't allow it in my home. Having said that I will support additional charge for tobacco smokers about the same time as we triple the health care insurance for the obese. Since the AMA says obesity is the single worst PREVENTABLE killer in America. Worse than Tobacco. Why don't we start with Numero Uno as the place to get our ducks lined up on Health care?

[Zazziness]

Let's not forget alcohol can have a huge negative impact on health. So as long as we're trying to force people to "be healthy," everyone who ever takes a drink goes on the list of higher insurance rates.

[DerivePI]

Totally agree. There are even some successful insurance programs that "reward" people who exercise and lose weight.

[jessejaymes]

@Zazziness I don't drink alcohol either. I have no objection to what you say but I do remind you that the AMA says 95% of obesity is due to laziness, overeating, fast food and sugar. Fat is not beautiful. It's killing this nation. We're a bunch of porkers.

[AceLuby]

@jessejaymes A big part of it is the crap food science that the govt passes off as healthy. We're a nation addicted to carbs and scared of fat, not telling people that carbs turn into sugar which turns into body fat, while fat is typically used immediately or discarded.

[jessejaymes]

@AceLuby that's my understanding as well. What people just won't accept is that it's just as cheap to eat decently as it is to eat poorly. And it only takes about 10 days and you system stop screaming for the crap food and start enjoying the good food. I can't go a day without my salad topped with Tuna (packed in water) and my dab of low calorie Ranch dressing. But I did read what you're saying. Fat is not all bad anymore than all Cholesterol is bad. There is good fat and bad fat.

[Thunderchicken]

I already would if I smoked. My health insurance has been structured like this for many years.

[marine1]

What next, the super burger eaters or those that buy slurpies over 32 oz.

[Zazziness]

What a great way to see to it some people die slow, agonizing deaths from untreated cancer. This is NOT the way to go.

[Russell797]

You know what though, they brought it on themselves in spite of constant warnings and appeals from family members and doctors not to start smoking in the first place or to quit if already smoking. The smoker most of the time tells you to go f yourself. They get what they asked for, and then the rest of us pay for it. Not any more. Please.

[Zazziness]

@Russell797 You can say the same of overweight people, people who drink alcohol, people who ride bicycles, just plain people. It is a risky thing to be alive and there is not a one of us who doesn't risk his health in the pursuit of happiness. It the big cities, breathing the air is a risk, let alone deciding to cross the street. In the rural areas, snakes and other critters can take you down -- but hey, you chose to live there, right?
Leave insurance rates the same for all. It's really the only fair thing to do.

[Zazziness]

@HooverNiebold Neither of you really understand how pooling everyone's resources so that all are covered works. Such greedy, "Me, me, me" people.

I tell you what -- the moment you come down with a serious illness or injury, you're not going to be saying "Oh, hey. I wouldn't have been run over by that car if I hadn't chosen to leave my house. By all means, void my insurance."

[Russell797]

@Zazziness I bicycled almost a thousand miles this past year and hope to do it again this year. The risk is outweighed by the benefit. Drinking alcohol in moderation and responsibly is not a problem. Most people living in polluted cities have little choice but to endure the pollution. Crossing the street is necessary to our mobility. Be cautions in areas known to harbor snakes. Be smart and weigh the positives versus the negatives of engaging in any activity. Choosing to smoke is not smart, is dangerous to your health and the health of others around you. There is not one positive thing that can be said in support of the decision to smoke. It's all bad every way you look at it. It is a behaviour which needs to be discouraged. Nothing good comes of it.

[Knight80]

Should be other options for this question. It's a slippery slope to play because you would have to wonder what was next. If you drink alcohol - it goes up. If you eat hamburgers and hotdogs - it goes up. Etc.... You will have insurance companies and work places in general making their own rules up on what you can and can't do or you insurance will be more.

[Zazziness]

How long before exercise is mandatory?

[jessejaymes]

That's incorrect. You can eat all the hamburgers you want just as long as you're not obese. THAT is the issue, not how you got to it. There should be no discrimination between the fat ass who has to have the Triple Burger and the fat ass who has to have the double cheese pizza. The choice is yours. I lost nearly 40 lbs and kept it off for nearly 5 years now by simply quite eating fast food, colas, gravy and fried foods. One day a week i eat anything I want and I pork out. But the other days I eat right and the weight stays off. The choice is yours.

[Knight80]

@jessejaymes I understand what you are saying. I just think that it opens the door up for both the insurance company and/or work place to decide what you can eat/do or can't eat/do. What if they say that they don't like the fact you eat red meat or drink coffee.(you know how those reports are. it's good for you one day and not the next) Will they raise you rates on what they think is bad for you?

[jessejaymes]

@Knight80 where you been man? Corporations (including Ross Perot) have been dictating those things to workers for at least two decades now. Obamacare is a bastardized piece of crap that will only benefit the Insurance companies. I support socialized medicine that I have seen up close and personal in both Germany and France and it's superior to what we have.

[Fishbone345]

@Knight80 no one is saying they can't do those things. Feel free, just pay to play.
Medical costs are soaring ever higher as a direct result of unhealthy people, specifically heavy people who get Type II Diabetes.

[BossTweed]

Of course, Under the ACA, ALL non Union families except for Bureaucrats and Politicians, will pay WAY more for less. Very Orwellian. Very Pelosi. Pay up Suckers!

[Arumizy]

Should professional cliff jumpers, dynamite tossers and bungie jumpers have to? If you do something, on more then a rare occasiona that could have a huge detriment to your health then yes you shoudl pay more.Take responsibility for your actions people and stop expecting to be treated like you do not do something.

[crusader]

Those things would increase your life insurance more than your health insurance. Some life insurances do not cover specific dangerous activities such as those.

[FollowTheMoney]

What about blue collar workers, their health care cost are higher than white collar.

[Arumizy]

@crusader But the question and point remains, should people engaged in high risk choices that will definitly impact the cost of medical care very greatly and at a very high rate have to pay higher amounts to offset the initial cost and the increased chance.

[AlexMIA]

I thought Obamacare was supposed to make insurance affordable for everybody? How can you bypass pre-existing conditions so everyone can have affordable healthcare then talk about risk management where smokers are concerned? Will some of these states do the same thing with their legalized pot smokers? and to what level? I think I liked it better when I could choose if I wanted my own individual policy for about $160 a month at my age.

[jessejaymes]

We have to start drawing the line somewhere Alex. Obesity and smoking both should cost the person who is one or the other more than it does those who are not in those categories.

[AlexMIA]

@jessejaymes Yes, so many lines that should have been drawn. We should have drawn the line with the affordable care act.

[jessejaymes]

@AlexMIA I don't like Obamacare. It's a bastardized piece of crap that will only benefit the insurance companies. But I do support socialized medicine and have seen it work in Germany and France quite well. And I'm not budging on that so we don't need to go at each other over it.

[Russell797]

Unlike smoking which is a chosen behaviour, being overweight is a condition caused by a multitude of reasons. The decision to smoke is made in direct defiance of medical advise which insists one shouldn’t smoke. The smoker is intentionally adding to the cost of medical care just like anyone else engaging in high risk behaviour.

[Smallz87]

Instead of comparing being obese to smoking, how about a higher premium for someone who indulges in junk food more than 3 times a week? Maybe a higher cost of insurance for someone who eats out 5-10 times a week.

[AceLuby]

@Smallz87 That's impossible to track, weight and obesity is not. It shouldn't matter how one gets obese, once one gets there they have higher risks of negative effects. @Russell797, being obese is a chosen behavior as well, it doesn't take a whole lot of work to track what one eats and make better decisions to lose weight. I know because I've lost 25 lbs this year by doing just that. Eating is most definitely a behavior.

[Russell797]

@Smallz87 You could go one comparing this behaviour versus others indefinitely if the line between them is blurred. For me at least, I differentiate smoking from eating in a clear distinction, since eating is a necessity of life, while smoking is not.

[Smallz87]

@Russell797 for an insurance company to know you smoke they would have to ask right? Eating is something we have to do but eating unhealthy is a choice. Is cancer associated with smoking the leading cause of death or is heart disease associated with poor diet the leading cause of death?

[Smallz87]

@Smallz87 the insurance company would have to ask how often you excersize and eat out. Then they would understand the origin
Of a persons obesity and be able to assess them at a greater risk of health problems alongside someone who smokes.

[BelinKS]

When my husband started smoking, there were not all these things saying smoking is bad for you. No warnings, no warning labels, and hardly any doctor would say anything about smoking. On the contrary, the cigarette companies claimed smoking cigarettes were good for your vitality!

[PNWest]

The first surgeon generals report on the dangers of smoking came out in 1964. But people knew that smoking was bad for you much farther back at least as far back as the 1920's. After 1964 is would be hard for anyone to say that the evidence wasn't very clear. Here's a popular song from the 1940's talking about the health risks and addictiveness of cigarettes - http://www.youtube.com/watch... .

[jessejaymes]

@PNWest I'm 66 and I knew about that song from my earliest memory. People knew cigarettes were bad for you. My parents smoked. Dirt poor all their lives. We never even had a TV while I was at home but they smoked. Had money for that. When my mother needed money in the last years of her life while dying of cancer I sent her a few thousand dollars to have one splurge in her lifetime. Just to get anything she wanted without worrying what it cost. First thing she did was buy 10 cartons of cigarettes.

[BelinKS]

@PNWest
But did that information make it to the very rural southerners? For that matter, did the song? I doubt it on either.

[BelinKS]

@PNWest
Catchy song, but they still did not know how harmful cigarettes were. Just that inhaling smoke into your lungs is bad for you.

[PNWest]

@BelinKS The song was Tex Williams and country and western was much more popular in the south back in those days. Not sure about how much info was generally available but I'm pretty sure that people knew smoking wasn't good for you. I doubt if they knew the extent of the risks though.

[RealityOne]

I quit smoking 13 yrs ago....tobacco smoke makes me sick now. Still I suppose I could still suffer the effects...what would I pay?

But until the late 1970s smoking was considered reasonably healthy, and in the 40s 50s and 60s it was practically a universal habit. Just listen to some old Lucky Strikes commericials. You'll hear things like "deep down smoking enjoyment" "Light up a lucky" to relax...(you deserve it)......"never a rough puff".......on radio, TV, magazines, billboards.....I think that many people initially smoked without being educated....they were mislead. misinformed, and propagandized. There needs to be some consideration of this.

[MarkJM]

Yes, and if you don't want to pay more, then quit. I quit years ago, best thing I have ever done. I don't get sick as often (which has saved me hundreds in healthcare costs alone), can actually taste and enjoy my food, have more energy throughout the day, I could go on and on about the positives of quitting smoking. It is proven that smokers are sick more often and their illnesses are more complicated. I don't care if one smokes as I used to, but if that smoker doesn't want to quit, then he/she should be made to pay the extra in difference in healthcare costs, not those who have quit or never smoked to begin with.

[Canoochee]

I don't agree. I and the other smokers here where I work are sick far less often than most. I have taken two days off in the last three years for health reasons.

I had to take off to have surgery to replace a joint I broke in an accident. Even then I worked part of the second day from home.

[DARSB]

It's a crazy world. Here we are talking about raising insurance rates for people addicted to a carcinogen our government pays farmers to grow. http://goo.gl/obVuh

[ctc]

Smokers are the ones "walking point" on the war against most cancers, heart disease, emphysema, and a laundry list of other debilitating conditions. They are prodded, poked, experimented on as guinea pigs and continually giving their lives in the search for those cures.......why should we charge them even more for insurance after making such sacrifices?? ;)

[RealityOne]

And what about drinkers? Alcohol is devastrating on the human body...should they pay more? Why is it always cigarettes?

What about...people who bought asbestos insulation in the 1940s and 1950s?

People who drink soda/pop/soft drinks? High Fructose Corn syrup causes diabetes and obesity. The BPA in the plastic bottles causes hormone changes. The brominated vegetable oil causes neurological disorders. The fluoridated filtered tap water in the soda rots your brain.

Let's just give people products that make them sick so that we can sell them over-priced and dangerous drugs to bandaid the symptoms without curing the disease. Then we can give them more drugs to treat the side effects of the first drugs. And we can charge them a premium if they got sick using our products!

They will never figure it out either! WOO HOO!

[RoFroh]

Not unless they gonna charge drinkers and fat people the same thing....I don't smoke but fair is fair!!!