House Bill 3224, titled the State Living Donor Protection Act, would prohibit insurers from denying, limiting, canceling, or otherwise discriminating against a person in several lines of insurance solely because that person is a living organ donor. The bill applies this protection to individual and group life insurance, major medical coverage, disability insurance, long-term care insurance, and health care corporation major medical policies. It also bars insurers from conditioning continued coverage on a person’s agreement not to donate an organ.
The bill amends multiple sections of the West Virginia Insurance Code and adds new prohibitions to the affected articles. In each covered insurance category, the measure states that adverse treatment based solely on living organ donor status is unlawful, while preserving the insurer’s ability to consider other actuarial risks and underwriting factors. The Insurance Commissioner is given enforcement authority, and the bill leaves existing rating, underwriting, and policy-form approval rules in place except where they conflict with the new anti-discrimination provisions.
Impact
HB3224 would change West Virginia insurance law by adding a protected status for living organ donors across several insurance products and by overriding any conflicting policy language or underwriting practice that treats donor status as a basis for adverse action. It would affect insurers offering life, group life, accident and sickness/major medical, long-term care, disability, and health care corporation coverage, and would require the Insurance Commissioner to enforce the new restrictions. The bill does not eliminate ordinary underwriting or actuarial distinctions, but it limits those distinctions to factors other than living organ donor status.
Sentiment
The available context suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill, as it was introduced by a group of delegates and framed as a consumer-protection measure for organ donors. The bill text presents the policy as a targeted anti-discrimination safeguard rather than a broad insurance overhaul. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented opposition or recorded floor sentiment in the supplied materials.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is whether insurers should be prohibited from using living organ donor status in underwriting at all, especially if they believe donation could correlate with future medical risk or claims experience. The bill addresses that concern by allowing insurers to rely on other actuarial risks, but it bars decisions based solely on donor status. Another possible drafting issue is that the bill amends several insurance articles at once, so insurers and regulators would need to ensure consistent implementation across life, health, disability, long-term care, and health corporation coverage. No specific opposing arguments are included in the provided record.
Making a supplementary appropriation to the Department of Human Services, Bureau for Medical Services – Policy and Programming and State Board of Education – State Department of Education
Expiring funds to the unappropriated surplus balance in the State Fund, General Revenue, from the Department Revenue, State Budget Office, PEIA Rainy Day Fund