A PRIVATE insurer is doing this. Government is looking into it specifically with respect to its cost effectiveness and justification.

PRIVATE insurances had wanted to do this before, but government regulations stepped in and said "you can't force fat people to pay more just because they're fat"... Government didn't give any real economic defense for this, they just did it out of pandering. Then one PRIVATE insurance group turned this debate on its head and said: "well, I'll give fit people a discount for being fit, and let everyone who is not fit pay the NORMAL rates"...

So government interference was trying to advocate on behalf of what you wanted, while private insurers were trying to do what you objected to. The final outcome was that one private insurer found a loophole that everyone finds objectionable, but they aren't allowed by government to do something that I would consider more fair and you would consider more objectionable...

Because this loophole worked around the government regulations and now is supposedly saving a private insurer money... now government is considering it for their own "public option" that will compete with private insurers.

Meanwhile, I support the government option and oppose what I see as pandering and indefensible government regulations, while you oppose the public option yet support that same government regulation... We both hate the loophole which yielded a policy that is poor enough that neither of us support.