Until the election, expect supporters of the misguided and mandatory long-term-care program to continue misleading Washingtonians about what WA Cares does and who benefits from I-2124
Elizabeth New (Hovde)
Washington Policy Center
A “No on 2124” email in my inbox erroneously says that Initiative 2124, the measure that would make participation in WA Cares voluntary instead of mandatory, “only benefits the super wealthy and big private insurance companies.”
False. Many Washington state workers being penalized by having 58 cents of every $100 they earn taken from their paychecks disagree. Many family caregivers who don’t expect to benefit from WA Cares disagree.
It is accurate to say that WA Cares — the state program that will be impacted should voters say “yes” to I-2124 — will benefit the state budget and Service Employees International Union 775, which is WA Cares’ main supporter and I-2124’s main opponent.
In addition, some, but not all, workers who end up needing long-term-care services someday — and who have paid taxes to WA Cares during their entire career years — will receive a $36,500 payout from the state program. That is not the primary purpose of this fund, however. (Nor is that amount adequate to fund most people’s long-term-care needs.) The purpose of the WA Cares Fund is to give the state more money to work with and create more taxpayer-funded caregivers.
Those who qualify for a WA Cares benefit in years to come might not need to be dependent on other taxpayers for long-term care, even though the money they’ll receive was gathered from workers of all incomes, including some who were taxpayer-dependent. Other workers who clear the qualification hurdles in front of a WA Cares benefit and do have a financial need for long-term care would have been eligible for funds in an already existing safety net (Medicaid) without having a portion of their wages taken for years.
Until the election, and probably after, expect supporters of the misguided and mandatory long-term-care program to continue misleading Washingtonians about what WA Cares does and who benefits from I-2124. The misleading information complements the state’s practice of offering false promises about WA Cares.
Elizabeth New (Hovde) is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Workers Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.
Also read:
- Rep. David Stuebe sponsors bill to strengthen enforcement of auto insurance laws and protect Washington drivers
Rep. David Stuebe has introduced HB 2308, a bill aimed at strengthening enforcement of Washington’s auto insurance laws and increasing accountability for repeat uninsured drivers. - Opinion: Vancouver councilors responsible for stoking irrational fears in the community
Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance sharply criticizes a Vancouver City Council declaration on immigration enforcement, arguing it fuels fear, undermines law enforcement, and lacks supporting evidence. - An icy reception for Gov. Bob Ferguson’s proposed budget cuts
Advocates for schools, child care, higher education, and climate programs sharply criticized Gov. Bob Ferguson’s proposed budget cuts during early legislative hearings. - Opinion: Washington should stop shielding domestic abusers and sexual offenders from deportation
Vancouver attorney Angus Lee argues Washington law improperly shields convicted domestic abusers, sexual offenders, and drunk drivers from deportation and urges lawmakers to change it. - Opinion: Who is leaving Washington and why the politicians need to care
Mark Harmsworth argues Washington is losing higher-income taxpayers and business owners, warning that rising taxes and regulation threaten long-term economic stability.
