|
 |
|
|
|
From the Publisher: Asking the right questions |
|
|
|
Written On: November/December 2007 |
|
|
|
Written By: by Don C. Brunell, AWB President |
|
|
|
When lawmakers dropped the final curtain on the legislative session last spring, they left a boatload of unfinished business—all of which could cost billions. They vowed to study climate change, health care and paid family leave, among other dicey issues.
Fortunately, our economy remains fairly good, but there are storm clouds on the horizon. Will lawmakers ask themselves if they can afford all the new taxes to pay for these new programs without putting a huge dent into our competitiveness and job market?
Last session, the Legislature hurriedly scraped together just enough votes to pass a skeletal paid family leave bill in the final hours. Seed money came from an $18 million loan from a workers' compensation contingency reserve that has absolutely nothing to do with the birth or adoption of a child. They temporarily parked the authority with the Department of Labor and Industries, which administers the state’s workers’ compensation program intended to assist injured or disabled workers.
Inside Olympia, paid family leave is like a hot potato. To run it, either L&I or Employment Security will be assigned to collect money from workers—and perhaps employers—whether they benefit or not. At last count, L&I figured it would take around $70 million a year to operate the program. That's before a dime's worth of benefits are shelled out.
The questions legislators need to ask: Who, exactly, will this new law benefit? Will $250 a week for six weeks be enough? Will lawmakers allow employers and workers to opt out when the employer offers a better program?
Paid family leave benefits expansion
Furthermore, will Washington's law expand like some elected officials want? Where will it stop? Sick family members, people enrolling in training and education programs, elder care? Isn't there a better way to handle paid leave without a mammoth new government bureaucracy and the new taxes to pay for it?
Government-run health care
Some want to toss out health care programs that are working and replace them with an untested experiment making its way west from Massachusetts. What happens to insurance plans that are working?
For example, Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler doesn't care for association health care plans like AWB’s HealthChoice and tried to regulate them out of existence. Along with Associated Industries of Spokane, AWB hauled the commissioner into court. Judge Kathleen M. O'Connor told Kreidler point-blank that he doesn't have the authority under current law to regulate them; she told him to go to the Legislature to request the necessary authorization.
He may even ask the Legislature to approve a single-payer, government-run, Canadian-style health care program. Association health plans are operating in the private, taxpaying sector just as Gov. Mike Lowry and the Legislature envisioned in 1995. They are providing affordable insurance for more than 500,000 people in Washington. More than 40 percent of those people had no health care coverage before association plans were approved. These aren’t corporate giants—they are tiny businesses with five or fewer workers.
Do we really want government to run our health care system? Do we want to pay a 15-percent sales tax like Canadians fork over to pay for it? Do we want the long lines Canadians face every day waiting for many treatments?
Climate change international problem
On climate change, everyone wants to stop global warming, but how? What good are unilateral actions that Washington lawmakers may authorize when countries like China, India and other developing nations are spewing out greenhouse gases by the thousands of tons every day? Doesn't it make more sense to approach this issue on a regional, national or international basis? After all, air, water and pollution flow freely past state and national borders.
With the economy heading for a bumpy ride, is now the time to jump into new programs that will raise costs for employers who are working hard to provide jobs for people, pay taxes and survive and grow in Washington? Remember, we budgeted to spend 15 percent more this two-year budget cycle. At best guess, we will only bring in 7 percent more revenue. Where is the rest going to come from without raising taxes or fees on employers?
|
|
|
|
