Elizabeth New (Hovde) says lawmakers shouldn’t be treating insurance like an ATM in the name of affordability
Elizabeth New (Hovde)
Washington Policy Center
When the Washington state Legislature meets, as it is doing now, you can count on health care costs to get more expensive. This year, two cost-increasing bills moving through the legislative process seek “affordability” by making the purchase of health coverage more expensive.
House Bill 2626 has a hearing Feb. 3 at 8 a.m. in the House Committee on Finance. It proposes increasing an insurance premium tax that is applied to health insurance providers, adding a new tax on other providers and removing an exemption on yet others. The takeaway? The state proposes to increase the tax on the sale of health coverage and related services. It shouldn’t be a surprise when health care costs rise even higher.
Another bill, House Bill 2073, takes a different, damaging approach. This proposal requires nonprofit health carriers to report their annual surplus and directs the Office of the Insurance Commissioner to decide whether the carrier’s surplus is “excessive.” If it deems that it is, the carrier must pay 3% of the excess to the commissioner’s office. The money won’t go back to those who purchased insurance but to a state subsidy account.
What? Why is the remedy a state sweep into a program for other people? If the Legislature believes a nonprofit carrier is charging and then holding “too much” money, the excess should go back to the people who funded the excess — premium payers — through lower future rates, premium credits or rebates. Lawmakers shouldn’t be treating “excess surplus” like a public revenue source.
If the state wants health care to cost less, lawmakers should reduce regulations that block competition, transparency and innovation. They could strengthen rate reviews and focus on consumer relief, not state skims. Several cost-saving measures exist, including better protecting taxpayer-provided safety nets, not widening them.
Lawmakers shouldn’t be treating insurance like an ATM in the name of affordability. Health care doesn’t become more affordable for all by making its purchase more expensive.
Elizabeth New (Hovde) is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.
Also read:
- POLL: The IBR project is described as only 30% designed and 30% funded after more than six years of work. How confident are you in the current management of the IBR program?
IBR’s cost has climbed from $3.2–$4.8B to $15.2B while the project remains 30% designed and 30% funded. - Opinion: Two bridges, one expanding bill
Bracchi traces how the IBR’s estimated cost grew from roughly $3B to $14.4B as Vancouver’s Bridge Shelter adds millions in annual operating costs alongside existing homelessness programs. - Opinion: WFSE demands a ‘fair’ contract — but workers and taxpayers can’t see the numbers
Elizabeth New (Hovde) argues neither state workers nor taxpayers can evaluate what is “fair” when wage proposals and their costs remain undisclosed. - Opinion: Washington’s ‘regressive’ tax debate ignores where people and money are moving
Washington Policy Center’s Ryan Frost argues the state’s operating budget rose from $33.6B to $80.2B, driving new taxes and worsening competitiveness. - Opinion: Trump Is Winning. Can You Name Five Wins?
Nancy Churchill lists Trump-era policy wins on taxes, border, ranching, and energy ahead of midterm elections.
