Elizabeth Hovde believes supporters of WA Cares have the wrong idea
Elizabeth Hovde
Washington Policy Center
Those hoping for tax relief in Washington state in 2024 might want to watch paint dry instead.
Current state leadership is choosing to tax us more even in times of budget surplus. Contrast this with the many states, including Idaho, California and New York, who recently chose tax relief for their state residents. Or compare Washington’s tax ways with the state of Oregon, where taxpayers are used to tax refunds of hundreds, even thousands, of dollars in budget years with revenue excess because of a decades-old kicker law. Oregon expects to be issuing a record $5.6 billion refund to its taxpayers this coming spring.
In Washington state, instead of returning excess money to working families, lawmakers have been deciding they can better spend the cash on a host of new government programs and offerings.
The sentiment that the state should be providing for people instead of expecting personal responsibility and self-sufficiency when it’s possible reared its budget-bloating head in comments from supporters of keeping WA Cares as-is this week. It makes some sense out of the state’s practice of keeping taxpayer money even when it is not needed. (WA Cares is the state-imposed long-term-care program fueled by a payroll tax that started in July.)
Jessica Gomez-Barrios, the political and advocacy coordinator for SEIU 775, a union representing paid caregivers — a group that will grow under WA Cares — said of the initiative effort trying to make participation in WA Cares optional that the initiative would force workers to deplete their savings to qualify for Medicaid’s long-term-care (LTC) assistance. (Gomez-Barrios is also the campaign manager of We Care For WA Cares, a coalition of organizations advocating for the LTC program and tax increase.)
This argument is one the state often makes for WA Cares when trying to convince Washington’s workers, including low-income ones, that they should like the new long-term-care program they’re forced to fund.
Wait. Shouldn’t we deplete our savings before asking other taxpayers to pay for our many life needs, including homes, food, transportation, or, in this case, possible long-term care? Everyone has life needs. They are all different. And as supporters and the state make clear, Medicaid LTC assistance is available for people without adequate resources who need care.
Gomez-Barrios added, “Millions of working Washingtonians are counting on the WA Cares Fund to help pay for their care in case of injury, illness, or age.” If that’s true (it’s not), it is the state’s fault. It has had a full-press marketing campaign telling people they can have “peace of mind” because they’re paying into WA Cares. Workers can’t count on the WA Cares Fund. Because of program eligibility requirements, many workers who pay into WA Cares — even those needing long-term care someday — won’t benefit. Also, the lifetime benefit amount of $36,500 won’t usually be enough for LTC needs.
Supporters of WA Cares have the wrong idea: We need as many workers as possible using their own money on their own needs. Taxpayer help should be a last resort. State and federal safety nets need to be protected and strengthened, not widened for people who aren’t in need.
Elizabeth 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: With updated estimates reaching as high as $17.7 billion, what should happen to the I-5 Bridge replacement project?
A new poll asks readers how the I-5 Bridge replacement project should proceed amid higher cost estimates and questions about transparency within the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program. - Letter: ‘Walz’s tough talk is a blatant attempt to deflect his complicity in the massive fraud in his state’
Camas resident Anna Miller argues that a governor has no legal authority to deploy the National Guard to interfere with federal law enforcement and criticizes Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s public statements. - Opinion: Not a Good choice
Lars Larson argues that personal choices led to a deadly confrontation with law enforcement during an ICE operation in Minneapolis. - Opinion: ‘The IBR team has been lying to us and thanks to a veteran Oregon journalist, we have the smoking gun’
Ken Vance argues newly obtained documents show Interstate Bridge Replacement staff withheld updated cost estimates from lawmakers and the public. - Opinion: State CO2 report shows 86% of Washington’s claimed climate benefits are probably fake
Todd Myers argues a state climate report significantly overstates emissions reductions and raises concerns about data accuracy and accountability in Washington’s climate spending.
