Lawmakers failed on WA Cares changes

A state public-relations campaign is underway suggesting that because the state Legislature passed a bill allowing people to use a WA Cares Fund benefit to receive long-term care outside of the state, it’s a sure thing you’ll benefit. That’s not a sure thing.

I received an email from the state about the legislation Friday. It read, “Planning to leave Washington in the future? Now you can take your WA Cares benefit with you, thanks to a new law passed last month and signed by Gov. Inslee today.” The suggestion is that you’ll benefit whether you live in or out of state one day.

Before now, moving out of state automatically disqualified you from receiving a benefit. Despite the portability legislation, you still might be denied. There are other hurdles Washingtonians need to clear before seeing any return on their tax-required investment of 59 cents on every $100 they earn.

First, you have to need long-term care. Some of us won’t. Second, you need to meet state definitions about health criteria, and the state’s are considered more burdensome than those in the private industry.

Next, you have to have paid into WA Cares for, typically, 10 years without a break of five or more years, and you have to have worked a minimum of 500 hours in each of those years. There is talk among policymakers about increasing the 500-hour amount to 1,000.

That vestment qualification as is and with the proposed change will rule out many family caregivers. Some working parents care for their children, work part-time or return to full-time work after raising kids, then are needed to care for aging parents. Often, there will be no WA Cares benefit for them.

A simplifying of the vestment criterion was proposed in other legislation considered this session but did not pass. Among them were two I was hoping for. They included changing the “without a five-year break” wording in the law and letting people on non-immigrant work visas be automatically exempt.

Why now?

A lack of WA Cares portability has been widely criticized, and energy for a course correction has been ignored for several years now. So why is the Legislature changing this detail now? I think Initiative 2124 provided lawmakers with the motivation. The initiative will be on the Nov. 5 ballot and could make WA Cares and its payroll tax optional.

Portability makes WA Cares look less bad. Don’t be fooled. Looking less bad does not make WA Cares a good deal.

WA Cares is not a safety net program and the taxes collected are not premiums. They are taxes.

The 2024 Legislature missed the opportunity to dump WA Cares before voters get a chance to make the program optional in November.

State leaders should be reforming Medicaid, protecting it from abuse and increasing taxpayer awareness of potential needs when it comes to long-term care. Instead, they are giving Washington state workers a portability promise that might not ring true.

— Elizabeth Hovde is the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. Email her at [email protected].