Yesterday, the city of San Francisco filed a lawsuit against the state, accusing the insurance commissioner of allowing health insurance companies to discriminate against women.
According to a Los Angeles Times article, women pay as much as 39% percent more for health insurance than men — and the state law upholds this disparity.
California health insurance law allows what’s known as “gender rating, ” which allows insurers to consider gender when they set an applicant’s premiums.
“The Legislature explicitly lists gender as one of the factors to be considered. Until the Legislature changes the laws or the courts decide differently, we will uphold the law, ” said a spokesperson for the insurance commissioner.
The Times article quoted the law’s wording:
“Unless otherwise prohibited by law, premium, price or charge differentials because of the sex of any individual when based on objective, valid and up-to-date statistical and actuarial data or sound underwriting practices are not prohibited. ”
The rationale behind the gender rating concept is that women apparently have a higher risk of injury and illness. Last year, actuaries at one of California’s largest insurers determined women are more at risk using their health care data.
But San Francisco officials argue this is gender discrimination and should be banned.
“A lot of times, women are priced out of private health coverage because of the discriminatory practices by insurance companies, ” said Dennis Herrera, San Francisco’s City Attorney.
The issue is already, however, being looked at in Sacramento. State lawmakers are considering two different bills that would outlaw health insurance gender rating.
If either of these bills is passed, Herrera would drop the suit.
There’s certainly a moral standard here being tested. On one hand, gender rating seems to be reasonable if backed with hard statistics. On the other, how can it be anything but discrimination?