The Castle Amendment – Bend Over!

Filed in Delaware, National by on November 8, 2009

Here is the amendment Mike Castle added to the GOP “Die Quickly” Health Insurance Bill.

‘‘In applying subparagraph (B), a group health plan
(or a health insurance issuer with respect to health
insurance coverage) may vary premiums and cost
sharing by up to 50 percent of the value of the benefits under the plan (or coverage) based on participation (or lack of participation) in a standards-based
wellness program.’’.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made
by paragraph (1) shall apply to plan years beginning
more than 1 year after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

So Mike Castle’s contribution to the bill is to allow your health insurance company to raise your premiums 50% because you didn’t adhere to their strict-as-hell wellness program (which probably requires you to report to them your diet and exercise habits).

I’m serious, that’s Mike Castle’s plan – letting your insurance company raise your rates for not exercising enough. The goal is to generate profits for the health insurance monopolies that contribute huge sums of money to his campaign (an industry generating record profits at the expense of bankrupting consumers). This isn’t your typical “weak-tea” Castle spinelessness, this is the real Mike Castle finally showing it’s evil, crooked face and telling you to “bend over” in the name of profit.

The next time you hear someone suggest they might vote for Castle, or that he’s some kind of “moderate”, remind them that Castle wanted to raise our health insurance premiums 50%.

What a sick fucking crook.

Tags: , , ,

About the Author ()

X Stryker is also the proprietor of the currently-dormant poll analysis blog Election Inspection.

Comments (14)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Sites That Link to this Post

  1. The Best We Can Do….. « kavips | November 8, 2009
  1. xstryker says:
    November 8, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    This is the face Castle makes when he is making you bend over.

  2. jason330 says:
    November 8, 2009 at 1:16 pm

    How do you really feel X? That amendment and his stupid BS statement about savings is not meant to be taken seriously by anyone not sitting on the News Journal editorial board.

  3. cassandra_m says:
    November 8, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    x — this says you can be charged extra is you are not part of a wellness plan. Not necessarily one offered by your insurer. So they can change your premiums based on your participation in a wellness program, but there is nothing here that requires the insurance company to provide you a wellness program, nothing here that defines “standards based wellness program”, nothing here that precludes a wellness plan provider from charging you extra for that.

    This wouldn’t just penalize you for not joining your insurer’s wellness plan — it penalizes you for not joining a wellness plan even if your insurer doesn’t offer one.

  4. xstryker says:
    November 8, 2009 at 1:22 pm

    How do I feel?
    1. Hate Castle
    2. Hate exercise
    3. Hate Insurance Companies
    4. Very, very happy that Biden will mop the floor with this asshole.

  5. xstryker says:
    November 8, 2009 at 1:27 pm

    Information on Wellness Plans as defined by the Dept. of Labor under Bush:

    HIPAA Nondiscrimination. The Department of Labor recently issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2008-02 providing group health plan sponsors guidance for compliance with the wellness program exception to HIPAA nondiscrimination regulations. HIPAA generally prohibits discrimination based on “health status-related factors” including physical and mental illnesses, claims experience, receipt of health care, medical history, genetic information, evidence of insurability, and disability.

    Under the HIPAA wellness program exception, however, group health plans may offer premium discounts, rebates, reduced co-payments, and/or lower deductibles to participants and beneficiaries who take part in “programs of health promotion and disease prevention.” Under the HIPAA regulations, wellness programs that provide a reward merely for participation in the program (e.g., a heart disease educational program for participants with high blood pressure) are not subject to the HIPAA nondiscrimination rules. The only requirement for these participatory wellness programs is that they be made available to all similarly situated individuals. Programs requiring participants to meet a health-related standard to obtain a reward, such as a target cholesterol level, are subject to additional scrutiny. These standards-based wellness programs must ensure that:

    * the total reward does not exceed 20% of the cost of coverage;
    * the program is reasonably designed to promote health and prevent disease;
    * eligible persons have the opportunity to qualify at least once a year;
    * the reward is available to all similarly situated persons and a reasonable alternative standard (or waiver of initial standard) is available if attainment is unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition (plans can require hardship verification); and
    * plan materials describing the wellness program must disclose the availability of a reasonable alternative standard the possibility of a waiver of the initial standard, or state that the plan will work with individuals to develop an alternative standard at their request.

    Field Assistance Bulletin 2008-02 provides a checklist for plan sponsors to determine whether a wellness program is subject to the HIPAA nondiscrimination rules and assess the compliance of their programs. The FAB is available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/regs/fab2008-2.html.

    Get it? Insurers can already offer lower rates if you participate in a Wellness Program, but the Castle “Bend Over” Amendment would allow them to RAISE rates as well!

    FUCKING EVIL!!!

  6. jason330 says:
    November 8, 2009 at 2:09 pm

    That Castle’s Amendment tells government to intrude in your business and insurance companies to raise your rates will not be lost on the Biden team which will be using Castle’s head for a soccer ball one year from now.

  7. nemski says:
    November 8, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    Delaware Republicans are in for a huge surprise when they see the huge amount anti-Castle votes in Nov 10.

  8. nemski says:
    November 8, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    FYI, Dave Burris, don’t know what is happening with your comments, but we’re working on it. Apologies.

  9. nemski says:
    November 8, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    DB wrote (and it was accidentally deleted):

    So you want to force people upon penalty of prison to buy private health insurance, but you don’t want to give them a financial incentive to be healthy, which would drive down costs?

    Who exactly is guilty of the insurance company handout here?

  10. nemski says:
    November 8, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    DB wrote (and this one was accidentally deleted WTF?):

    And by the way, the House bill gives the Health Czar full reign to customize private health care plans, so if insurance companies do as you say, the all-powerful Health Czar can lay the smackdown on them.

    Whaddyagaht?

  11. jason330 says:
    November 8, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    Maybe Dave is deleting his own comments after he posts them on account of how stupid they are?

  12. Delaware Republican says:
    November 8, 2009 at 3:07 pm

    Keep on complaining but the further health care choices and consequences are from the individual the less you contain costs. The Pelosi plan does nothing to contain costs, nothing. Obama contains costs by screwing the elderly by massive cuts to Medicare.

    You can hope for anti Castle votes but what democrat can support a plan which guts Medicare and induces your employer to dump your insurance as the Pelosi plan does?

    My guess is this tragedy will die in the Senate before many other people die from such a disastrous proposal as the the Pelosi plan.

    The Dems are making it easier and easier on the republicans by proposing such garbage.The plan is so good it doesn’t take effect for years but the tax increases start immediately.

    Mike Protack

  13. Perry says:
    November 12, 2009 at 9:29 am

    The tax increases are on folks making more than $500K, in other words, those favored by the Bush tax cuts. Sounds good to me!

«
»