Vote No on I-2124. The future of WA long-term care for the aging depends on it

Tri-City Herald
BY THE TRI-CITY HERALD EDITORIAL BOARD
SEPTEMBER 13, 2024

Washington voters face a critical decision on the November ballot that will profoundly impact long-term care for many of their neighbors and the sustainability of our health care systems.

Initiative 2124, which proposes to make the WA Cares program voluntary, poses a serious threat to a crucial support system for older adults and those facing serious health challenges.

Voting “no” on it will help preserve WA Cares and ensure that all Washingtonians have access to at least a basic level of long-term care.

State lawmakers passed WA Cares in 2019 to address the looming crisis of long-term care affordability. Currently, about 5% of the population holds private long-term care insurance policies. That low rate is due in part to the fact that the policies can be prohibitively expensive and often come with strict eligibility requirements.

According to researchers at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, more than half the population will need some long-term care assistance in their older years, with about one-in-four retirees eventually requiring high-intensity care.

WA Cares begins to fill that gap by ensuring that all workers have basic coverage.

After working for 10 years — and paying the minimal 0.58% payroll tax during that time — workers are eligible to receive a $36,500 benefit.

That support can ease the strain on families and providers by helping more aging Washingtonians safely stay at home instead of moving into a care facility prematurely.

Critics complain that the lifetime benefit won’t fully cover the long-term care needs of many individuals, but this perspective misses the point entirely.

As the baby boomer generation ages, the demand for long-term care services will skyrocket, placing an enormous burden on families and the state’s Medicaid system.

Supports like home modifications, personal care assistance, transportation, meal services and home health visits can significantly delay or even prevent the need for more expensive institutional care.

Others argue that WA Cares should be optional, contending it’s unfair to require workers to join if they might never need long-term care or can find better private insurance.

They ignore that the program is a common good for all, not individual insurance. Indeed, the Office of the State Actuary warns that an opt-out provision could trigger an “insurance rate spiral,” where healthier, wealthier individuals leave the program, driving up costs for those who remain and ultimately rendering WA Cares unsustainable.

This is the same principle that makes programs like Social Security work — universal participation is necessary to keep it effective and affordable for all.

Meanwhile, nothing prevents individuals who opt to purchase more comprehensive coverage from doing so.

WA Cares is not a perfect solution to the long-term care crisis. The benefit amount is modest, and there are valid concerns about the program’s long-term funding stability. However, instead of dismantling it, as I-2124 would do, Washington should focus on improving and strengthening the program.

Those who focus solely on WA Cares’ current limitations miss the bigger picture: It represents a crucial first step in addressing a complex problem that will only grow more pressing with time.

By rejecting I-2124 and preserving WA Cares, Washingtonians can ensure that their friends, family and neighbors have the support they need to face life’s challenges with dignity and security.

The choice voters make in November will have far-reaching consequences for future generations.

WA Cares represents a forward-thinking approach to a problem that affects everyone, either directly or indirectly. By maintaining and improving this program, Washingtonians invest in a more secure and compassionate future for all. Vote no on I-2124 to help ensure that WA Cares can continue to evolve and serve the state’s needs.