Ala. To Charge Obese Workers $25 Monthly – KXAS | Dallas — Talk about a money maker. Alabama? Obese? Cha-ching!

I know, I could have gone for the cheap joke, but…

Alabama, pushed to second in national obesity rankings by deep-fried Southern favorites, is cracking down on state workers who are too fat.

The state has given its 37,527 employees a year to start getting fit or they’ll pay $25 a month for insurance that otherwise is free.

Alabama will be the first state to charge overweight state workers who don’t work on slimming down, while a handful of other states reward employees who adopt healthy behaviors.

Alabama already charges workers who smoke and has seen some success in getting them to quit but now has turned its attention to a problem that plagues many in the Deep South: obesity.




  1. Good on ’em.

    As long as their insurance pays for the gastric bypass surgery.

  2. Jägermeister says:

    Nice governor.

  3. R.O.P. says:

    Strangely enough, considering my hate for government intrusion into people’s lives, there is a certain justice to this action. Why should people have to pay for other people’s high risk activities? Smoking, obesity, alcoholism and drug addiction are high risk activities that should have an “at your own risk” disclaimer. $25 is only four four #6 MacDonalds meals. A small price to pay for coverage of at risk activity.

  4. Whatelse says:

    Its just the beginning of lifestyle modifications to be pressed on us by the corp/gov machine. And I guarantee you that it will all be geared toward profits. Either forcing you to forgo something (saving them money) or forcing to buy/consume/use a service.

    Several companies/organizations have forced employees to quit smoking or forfeit their employment already.

    For those who say “Why should people have to pay for other people’s high risk activities?” Thats not what this is about.

    Its nothing more than a profit-centric move. No different than moving operations offshore to maximize shareholder value.

    Oh yea and whos shares are we maximizing? Those that hold the most of any company. CEO, pres. Board members etc. And Yes I know the article is about Alabama State gov.

  5. MikeN says:

    Another reason to be against socialized medicine.

  6. gquaglia says:

    If they go by that outdated scale that says that anyone over 200lbs is obese, then I imagine just about everyone will be paying.

    Anyway I guess bubba didn’t read this article in the Times.

  7. bobbo says:

    #4–what==you say: “For those who say “Why should people have to pay for other people’s high risk activities?” Thats not what this is about.” /// Thats exactly what this is about except it is much better than off shoring jobs. In this case, the side benefit is jobs are kept in USA AND the workforce has great incentive to get more healthy.

    Yea, none of us like to be told what to do===even when we are wrong and need direct supervision.

    Try again.

  8. QB says:

    JagJägermeister LOL. I was thinking the same thing when I saw the picture.

    But Tina Fey is still hotter.

  9. Jägermeister says:

    #5 – MikeN

    It’s funny how most of you republicans are so religious and holier-than-thou, but few of you are good Samaritans.

  10. Jägermeister says:

    #8 – QB

    Miss Alabama will be ready for the big game by the next election. But she might get competition from Miss South Carolina.

  11. Lou says:

    Health Nazis.

  12. QB says:

    Jägermeister, I bet she’s republican.

  13. TheCommodore says:

    Now where does this end? You’ll be charged more for being too old? The more health issues you get the more you pay? There is no evidence out there that indicates obesity actually costs health insurers more money. In fact I recall reading something here that referenced a European study that said obesity might actually reduce insurance costs since morbidity causes you do die sooner. So it’s actually the HEALTHY that could cost the system more, since they’ll live long enough to need old age homes and the high costs of outliving your savings.

  14. R.O.P. says:

    Actually, TheCommodore, being older is not a bad thing. It means you have cheated death by not participating in high risk activities (consult your actuarial tables). We pay for all the folks that die young for the wrong reasons versus taking care of the survivors of life. I thought taking responsibility for your actions was a big right wing republican thing. Be fat, pay $25. Keep smoking, pay another $25. Why should I subsidize your free choice addictions?

  15. Michael says:

    Chargiug more for high risk activities? Sure! As long as we also charge more for motorcycle riding, reckless driving, skydiving, rock climbing, pregnancy after age 30, smoking, getting too little sleep, taking too many airplane flights, being married, having children, and having a stressful occupation. All of which have deleterious effects on health, and all of which are “voluntary”.

    Fat people don’t ask to be fat. Being fat is a miserable, lonely life. If losing weight were easy or safe, believe me, there would be no fat people.

  16. R.O.P. says:

    I totally agree with you Michael! However being married and having children is a positive thing for a person’s lifespan. Being fat is rarely something someone is subjected to due to medical conditions or genes (when it is, it deserves coverage at no extra cost). Lifestyle has a larger implication (as does being poor, but are right wingers going to willfully pay to help the poor?). Insurance programs should encourage healthy lifestyles to cut their costs (assuming you believe in capitalism). Already insurance companies are giving benefits to people that exercise regularly at health clubs, the corollary is making people pay for unhealthy activities. My wife has to pay extra for health insurance because she smokes. She admits it’s a reasonable accommodation, I agree, even though it costs our household.

  17. sirfelix says:

    “Soylent Green”, “Logan’s Run”, etc
    You pick the SciFi movie and our government will lean toward making them come true.

    Fascism comes in small steps so that the cattle can’t see them coming.

  18. Lou Minatti says:

    John,

    [Comment deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines.

    Ed.]

  19. Noel says:

    It seems fair enough in nearly all cases. I don’t think that the state should be able to force their workers to be weighed and I don’t think that doctors should be made to reveal such information. This should be applicable to people who are visibly obese or volunteer their medical information. I say this assuming that the state outsources the insurance. If however the state owns and administrates the insurance company I can’t see any obvious problems.

  20. WmDE says:

    If it ain’t fried, it ain’t done.

    Basal metabolism uses most of the calories consumed. Energy is consumed maintaining a body temperature of 98.6 degrees. In the south you can maintain 98.6 degrees by standing outside in the shade. It may be that a 2000 calorie diet is not appropriate for people living in warm climates. Cutting calories without cutting nutrients is a problem. This would mean living in a warm climate can cause a tendency to be “overweight.”

    Therefore Alabama is penalizing its state employees for living in the south.

  21. Skippy says:

    #5 – MikeN: you’re right, socialized medicine never works. Except in countries that are civilized to have them.

  22. Skippy says:

    [Duplicate comment deleted. – ed.]

  23. Skippy says:

    [Duplicate comment deleted. – ed.]

  24. Rick Cain says:

    America is the land of the fried candy bar. I don’t see how this will keep a fat man from his monkeybread.

  25. TomB says:

    This is what happens when you ask someone else to take care of you.

    Of course, no one is demanding they lose they weight. They still have free will (so far). They can all quit and leave the State of Alabama without a workforce.

  26. BubbaRay says:

    How long before they get hold of workers’ DNA and penalize them because their great grandfather had diabetes? How long before they surcharge a worker because he’s over 40?

    Insurance is supposed to be a pool, not a pie a company can divide up into countless subdivisions and rate. Rating is nothing new, but it’s usually based on experience, not on the come.

    Sure, I’d love to own an insurance company that is allowed to cherry-pick its clients. I’ll just insure those that have little risk.

    The discrimination line will have to be drawn somewhere or it won’t be insurance anymore. When the premiums approach the risk, who needs it?

  27. bobbo says:

    #26–Bubba==you don’t understand insurance at all.

    You say: “When the premiums approach the risk, who needs it?”

    Premiums by defintion must meet the risk plus a bit more for profit, management, advertising, political payoffs, etc.

    Risk evaluation has been the heart of insurance from the start. You are actually only complaining about accuracy and risk assessment/consignment. The better a company can cherry pick, the more money they make. Same with MediCare risk pools and every other pool and form of business.

    Its why this country need single payer. And even then, you can decide to charge smokers more. REALITY is a bitch.

  28. @26,27: “Premiums by defintion must meet the risk plus a bit more for profit, management, advertising, political payoffs, etc.” Yes, but in average over all insured, not for every single person. That is the crucial point and many existing Govt. regulations protect some aspects of it. Or everyone would be off better paying for services out of pocket.
    Also, what a single payer would do is either kill-off the medical services as USA knows them (losing good and importing bad and cheap doctors as well as losing infrastructure) or make you pay way more in taxes to cover loses. With competition, loses are paid by inefficient business who collapse in market driven insurance…

  29. Michael says:

    “Fat people don’t ask to be fat.”

    Ha! Of course they do – they eat too damn much.

  30. amodedoma says:

    That’s what I like about the states, if you don’t meet somebody else’s standards you’re defective, ill, a loser. Buncha Nazi’s! Funny thing is people who don’t have a GENETIC TENDENCY never have to worry about sacrificing to maintain an ‘acceptable’ weight. I had this friend thin as a rail. Ate all he wanted whenever he wanted, never got fat. Chili cheese fries, philly cheese steak, pizza, nachos, heck if I’d’ve eaten half of what this guy’d eat they’d have to bury me in a piano case. One day he suffered a cholesterol related brain embolism, never woke from the coma. Some of us with the tendency have had to learn to take care what we eat. Healthy is a matter of intelligent choices and not a matteer of having some ideal imposed by the state. On the other hand this is scary. How far a jump is it from this to insurance companies using our DNA to determine how much our health insurance should cost.


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 5334 access attempts in the last 7 days.