PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 1, 2009
Prohibits anything in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the Internal Revenue Code, or the Public Health Service Act from being interpreted to prevent any health insurance provider from establishing premium discounts or rebates, or modifying copayments or deductibles, for individuals who participate in a health promotion or disease prevention (wellness) program which meets this Act's requirements.
States that if none of the conditions for obtaining a premium discount, rebate, or other reward for participation in a wellness program is based on an individual satisfying a standard related to a health status factor, such program shall not violate this Act if participation is made available to all similarly situated individuals with respect to a program: (1) that reimburses the cost for memberships in a fitness center; (2) of diagnostic testing that provides a reward for participation not based on outcomes; (3) that encourages preventive care related to a health condition through the waiver of the copayment or deductible requirement under a health plan for costs related to a health condition (such as prenatal care or well-baby visits); (4) that reimburses individuals for the costs of smoking cessation programs without regard to whether the individual quits smoking; and (5) that rewards individuals for attending a periodic health education seminar.
Provides that if any of the conditions for obtaining a premium discount, rebate, or other reward for participation in a wellness program is based on an individual satisfying a standard related to a health status factor, the program shall not violate this Act if specified conditions are met, including that: (1) the reward for the program, together with the reward for other wellness programs regarding the plan that requires satisfaction of a standard related to a health status factor, does not exceed 30% of the cost of employee-only coverage under the plan; (2) the program is reasonably designed to promote health or prevent disease; (3) the plan gives individuals eligible for the program the opportunity to qualify for the reward at least annually; and (4) the full reward under the program is made available to all similarly situated individuals.
People & committees
Rep. Arcuri, Michael A. [D-NY-24] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to House Ways and Means
Referred to House Education and Labor
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Education and Labor, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Energy and Commerce
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3688 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3688 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3688 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3688 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.