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:
- With more state financial stress on horizon, Ferguson signs WA budget
Washington’s latest $79.4 billion state budget taps rainy day funds, reduces child care provider payments, and defers big tax collections, setting up a deficit in 2028. - Gov. Ferguson signs controversial law tightening standards for WA sheriffs
Sheriffs must now meet strict standards or risk removal, with local officials appointing replacements instead of voter recall, amid ongoing debate over constitutionality. - Opinion: Stalin would be proud – Clark County Socialists gathered for ‘No Kings’
Reform Clark County’s Rob Anderson criticizes local and national groups for organizing protests that featured Auditor Greg Kimsey as a keynote, raising concerns about public trust and political partisanship. - Opinion: The beginning of the end of anchor babies
Lars Larson argues the Constitution excludes children born to non-legal residents, as the Supreme Court debates birthright citizenship and public opinion data shows limited support. - VIDEO: Rejected – WA SOS will not process referendum to repeal income tax law
State officials stopped Let’s Go Washington’s referendum to overturn the new tax, citing constitutional limits. Legal and political battles, including a Supreme Court challenge, are expected next.
