Thune, Murphy Reintroduce Bill to Encourage Healthy Living
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) today reintroduced the Personal Health Investment Today (PHIT) Act, legislation that would encourage more physical activity in the United States and incentivize healthier living by allowing Americans to use a portion of the money saved in their pre-tax health savings account (HSA) and/or flexible spending account (FSA) toward qualified sports and fitness purchases, like gym memberships, fitness equipment, and youth sports league fees.
“Investing in preventive health is one way Congress can help incentivize America to be a healthier nation,” said Thune. “For some Americans, certain gym or athletic league membership costs can be prohibitive, keeping them from pursuing healthy habits like exercising or participating in other physical activities. By giving Americans greater flexibility with their HSAs and FSAs, we can help people make healthy choices, get active, and hopefully avoid the onset of costly chronic conditions.”
“I’m proud to reintroduce the PHIT Act with Senator Thune. Our bill is a great first step to encouraging Americans to lead healthier, more active lives,” said Murphy. “The PHIT Act would allow folks to use their own flexible spending accounts to cover physical activity expenses like gym memberships, little league and youth sports, and other fitness related equipment. This will help drive down health care costs and reverse the trend of obesity, diabetes and other chronic preventable diseases.”
“Kids are sitting on the sidelines because they can’t afford the fee to play sports,” said Tom Cove, president of theSports and Fitness Industry Association. “This is wrong and dooms the U.S. to future generations of an increasingly sedentary population. Youth activity is the foundation for an active healthy lifestyle. Cost has become a barrier to youth sports and PHIT will lower that barrier to give more children the opportunity of a healthy life.”
“At a time where there has been some decline in youth sports participation, the PHIT Act is a bold step in the right direction,” said Wayne B. Moss, executive director of the National Council of Youth Sports. “Passage of the bill will help more young people play. Research shows that participating in sports leads to physical, social, emotional and cognitive development and puts young people on a path to healthier lifestyles.”
“PHIT would provide millions of Americans the opportunity to get moving,” said Graham Melstrand, executive vice president of the American Council on Exercise. “By significantly reducing the financial barrier to participation by allowing the utilization of Flexible Spending Accounts and Health Savings Accounts for fitness and sports related services and activities, millions of adults and children would have the opportunity to change their behavior and live more healthy, active lives.”
Qualified expenses do not include: private clubs owned and operated by members or clubs with golf, hunting, sailing, or riding facilities. In the case of sports equipment (other than exercise equipment), reimbursement for a single item cannot exceed $250, and these pre-tax dollars cannot be used for general fitness apparel or footwear.
The PHIT Act is cosponsored by Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Angus King (I-Maine), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.).
###
It is not the federal government’s job to encourage me to live a healthier lifestyle. What happened to small government conservatism based upon constitutional principles?
Not so sure about that…
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Says it right there, doesn’t it?
Encouraging healthy living by way of Thune’s bill was not the intent of the Founding Fathers and you know it. So no, it doesn’t say it right there.
Er, no, I actually don’t KNOW it at all.
For instance: https://www.leagle.com/decision/1966821257fsupp5641721
“The health of the people was in the minds of our forefathers when they wrote the Preamble of the Constitution of the United States:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, promote the general Welfare.”
The health of free people is forever present in the minds of free men.…
Promotion and improvement of our people’s health is a corresponding duty to our inalienable right to the “pursuit of happiness;” it is a fundamental obligation of governments, national, state and local, instituted among men to secure man’s inalienable rights. The Congress of the United States and the state legislatures of the several states have in a multitude of ways established means to provide and care for the health of the people.
Precedent and case law are pretty clear on this. It’s precisely part of the congressional mandate to promote a healthy citizenry. Claiming otherwise is simply false.
Actually you are over thinking what the intent was and in doing so you now have to agree with socialized medicine. Please list the case law you proclaim is a constitutional right of Americans and where in the Constitution does it say Americans should be provided with health care of any kind including Thune’s healthy living mandate (while he ignores other legislation that actually helps people).
And please stop being anonymous if you want to be taken seriously. What are you afraid of?
I’m not overthinking anything – follow the link I provided and read the case. It’s established constitutional law that congress can and should promote a healthy populace. I said NOTHING about the government PROVIDING healthcare.
As far as anonymity goes, we again return to established constitutional law:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/514/334/
“Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.”
I’m sorry the Constitution doesn’t say what you think it does (or should), but if you’re going to go around touting “conservatism” and a “return to constitutional principles”, then you’d do well to actually understand what it actually says and how the courts have interpreted it.
IMHO, Ike makes a decent a point. I support the Personal Health Investment Bill b/c it represents an incremental, marginal benefit over the status quo. Good work by Sens. Thune and Murphy.
Read the federalist papers, maybe you’ll learn something. It’s all about interpretation but what you state is not a constitutional matter but federal laws, laws that can be changed. My first reaction is Thune spending his time on trivial issues while ignoring important issues that matter. We went to him on several important issues in the past and was ignored, one being the biggest issue of our lives today, the Green New Deal, which he ignored up until now when it’s probably to late to stop it. It is called priorities and Thune has always taken the path of least resistance.
Case law has largely taken Hamilton’s broad view of the “general welfare” clause for the last 150 years – so I pretty much stand by what I’ve already stated.
The rest of your silliness on “priorities” I can generally agree with – but I doubt you and I would agree on which priorities we’d like the focus on.
That’s odd. Senator Thune strikes me as exceptionally friendly and responsive. Although busy, he’s never once ignored my family. An approachable, courteous, and respectful gentleman IMHO. Sorry to hear of your frustrations.
Anonymous posters are taken seriously all the time. Your obsession with demanding people reveal their identities is creepy and you might consider knocking it off.
LOL, now here’s an educated person, ie Anonymous. Just kidding of course.
Now do this one in the context of abortion, you provide such valuable insight…
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I don’t think the Declaration of Independence carries the force of law in the same way as the Constitution. The two documents have entirely different purposes and audiences.
Sorry, that isn’t part of the pagan Democrat platform, so the health of the unborn is not of any importance to the Democrat party.
Whoa there! It’s just allowing some pretax money to go towards healthy living expenses. Beats the alternative of just using it for when you are sick because you are too fat and lazy to do anything.
While I believe health insurance should address this better at least it’s something. I spend a lot eating right, exercising and just generally taking care of myself yet I don’t get a break on my insurance. Tired of paying for people who don’t care about their health until they’re sick.
This is what Senator Thune was sent to Washington for? The good senator did nothing to help us diversify South Dakota’s economy and doesn’t even respond and now we know why. Thune takes the easy road; doesnt say much that helps South Dakotans and Americans; he keeps this low profile to sail through his career as an elected official with zero effect on improving lives. Recently he fell for Moulded Fiberglass Company’s rise to keep its tax credit for wind power when MFG announced it was shutting down its Aberdeen factory. Thune came to the rescue not caring that a hugely strong company wanted to come in and replace MFG that would have been the best thing that ever happened to South Dakota. South Dakotans, please rethink who you send to Washington, DC.
“Ruse” not “rise”……..
This sounds like a fantastic piece of legislation! My HSA is just a savings account, with the intent of being able to purchase the fitness equipment I really want when I retire (a long way away). What makes way more sense in my opinion, is letting me use that money to buy the fitness equipment right now, so I’m staying fit during my working years.
Solid point
Typical liberal, claiming adherence to the Constitution when you think it serves your purposes but otherwise kicking it to the curb.
Do you know that it’s possible to dislike a judicial ruling, but still be able to live and function under the law? A novel concept for you I’m sure, but there ya go.