House Republicans would let employers demand workers’ genetic test results

[MorningGlory]

4 minutes ago, JaniceR said:

I'm not going to argue either. I posted the text from the actual Bill. If that is not good enough for you..oh well. Time will tell.

Here's one from foxnews. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/11/gop-sponsored-bill-may-help-companies-obtain-your-genetic-information.html

The New York Times reported Friday that the bill-- called the Preserving Employee Wellness Programs Act--  may also significantly increase the costs if someone chooses not to participate in a company wellness program that requires the genetic information.

Fortune magazine summed up the bill: it “would essentially allow companies with workplace wellness programs to demand your genetic information (or force you to pay a big penalty.)”

It's not true and I have posted the proof of that.  It's one of those 'take some truth and add lies to it to make a total' type things.  The NY Times?  I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to start honest reporting.

[Guest]

Here is where the misunderstanding comes in. Snopes is correct in that the bill does not say employees can FORCE people to have genetic testing. What the bill does is allow employers to say that if employees will have genetic testing they will get a better rate on their insurance.

This has the effect of allowing those who do not want to be tested to be charged more for insurance.

This legislation overturns the GINA ACT.... The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (Pub.L. 110–233, 122 Stat. 881, enacted May 21, 2008, GINA, pronounced Gee-na), is an Act of Congress in the United States designed to prohibit the use of genetic information in health insurance and employment.

[Guest]

The GINA act which this bill would overturn....

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (Pub.L. 110–233, 122 Stat. 881, enacted May 21, 2008, GINA, pronounced Gee-na), is an Act of Congress in the United States designed to prohibit the use of genetic information in health insurance and employment. The Act prohibits group health plans and health insurers from denying coverage to a healthy individual or charging that person higher premiums based solely on a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future. The legislation also bars employers from using individuals' genetic information when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion decisions.

In 2008, on April 24 passed the Senate 95-0. The bill was then sent back to the House of Representatives and passed 414-1 on May 1; the lone dissenter was Congressman Ron Paul.^[5] President George W. Bush signed the bill into law on May 21, 2008.

 

To overturn GINA is a real coup for the insurance companies and puts us one step further into being a nanny state. Socialist countries already use this type of information to force health decisions on their citizens. We do not need that here.

[Logan]

And as already stated...the title of your thread, the title of the article are completely untrue and misleading.

[MorningGlory]

1 hour ago, JaniceR said:

Here is where the misunderstanding comes in. Snopes is correct in that the bill does not say employees can FORCE people to have genetic testing. What the bill does is allow employers to say that if employees will have genetic testing they will get a better rate on their insurance.

This has the effect of allowing those who do not want to be tested to be charged more for insurance.

This legislation overturns the GINA ACT.... The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (Pub.L. 110–233, 122 Stat. 881, enacted May 21, 2008, GINA, pronounced Gee-na), is an Act of Congress in the United States designed to prohibit the use of genetic information in health insurance and employment.

"What the bill does is allow employers to say that if employees will have genetic testing they will get a better rate on their insurance."

 

This is the important phrase; if an employee signs up for one of these plans they can gat up to 30% off on insurance premiums.  The article you posted stated  something completely different.  I don't understand why you posted the OP if you knew it wasn't true.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, MorningGlory said:

"What the bill does is allow employers to say that if employees will have genetic testing they will get a better rate on their insurance."

 

This is the important phrase; if an employee signs up for one of these plans they can gat up to 30% off on insurance premiums.  The article you posted stated  something completely different.  I don't understand why you posted the OP if you knew it wasn't true.

Perhaps you didn't read the article carefully. It does not go against what you are saying here. If an employee does not want to do the genetic testing, they are penalized by having to pay a higher rate. 

Are you really ok with your employer knowing your genetic history. Don't you see that this a a tool to control you and charge you a higher insurance premium. Do you feel that it is ok for employees to sell your information. One of our rights as Americans is Dr.-patient privilege. How long do you think it would take for genetic testing to become a prerequisite for employment, just as drug testing is now?

There is a law of unintended consequences. 

I don't want the government in my life to this extent.

 

[Guest]

Employers got virtually everything they wanted for their workplace wellness programs during the Obama administration. The ACA allowed them to charge employees 30 percent, and possibly 50 percent, more for health insurance if they declined to participate in the “voluntary” programs, which typically include cholesterol and other screenings; health questionnaires that ask about personal habits, including plans to get pregnant; and sometimes weight loss and smoking cessation classes. And in rules that Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued last year, a workplace wellness program counts as “voluntary” even if workers have to pay thousands of dollars more in premiums and deductibles if they don’t participate.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/house-republicans-let-employers-demand-workers-genetic-test-results/#.WMXOSFSa0go.facebook

 

[MorningGlory]

30 minutes ago, JaniceR said:

Perhaps you didn't read the article carefully. It does not go against what you are saying here. If an employee does not want to do the genetic testing, they are penalized by having to pay a higher rate. 

Are you really ok with your employer knowing your genetic history. Don't you see that this a a tool to control you and charge you a higher insurance premium. Do you feel that it is ok for employees to sell your information. One of our rights as Americans is Dr.-patient privilege. How long do you think it would take for genetic testing to become a prerequisite for employment, just as drug testing is now?

There is a law of unintended consequences. 

I don't want the government in my life to this extent.

 

I'm afraid it's you who doesn't understand that you posted a false story in the OP.  Now you're not understanding the bill.  You can get a REDUCED rate if you participate in the wellness programs.  If you don't, you simply pay the regular rate.  See?  Easy to understand if you simply read what is actually in the bill.  No one is going to be charged higher rates; you pay the REGULAR rate if you don't participate.  If you don't want anyone having your DNA, and I personally do not, you don't enroll in the program.  Just as an aside; the only way you can be forced to surrender your DNA is by a warrant under U.S. law.

[OneLight]

For those who want to know ... http://www.snopes.com/genetic-testing-bill/

Closed for the second time.