Debunking KOMO-ARC Segment
On April 19th, KOMO TV’s ARC Seattle show included a one-sided seven minute segment featuring just the spokesperson for Let’s Go Washington, the group trying to eliminate Washington’s long-term care benefits.
The No On I-2124 campaign sent the following email to the show’s producers, debunking the claims of the spokesperson, and requesting equal time.
Dear KOMO ARC Producers and hosts Holly Menino and Tyrah Majors -
We were shocked that your program included only I-2124’s spokesperson - no experts, or impacted stakeholders to help voters understand what’s at stake and why AARP, the National MS Society, doctors, nurses, and many more are coming together to oppose I-2124.
We are grateful that the program hosts made one reference to our concerns: “The concern from supporters of the long-term care fund is the effect it will have on millions of Washingtonians who are counting on it to help pay for their care.”
However, to ensure your viewers get the facts, we are requesting a follow up segment for the No on I-2124 advocates to explain what’s at stake and why they will be working to protect more than 3 million Washingtonian’s benefits by defeating I-2124.
The I-2124 spokesperson was factually incorrect when she said:
“I-2124 is simply offering workers the option” (05:23). The truth is independent long term care finance experts predict I-2124 would bankrupt the program, should the initiative pass. “If adopted, Initiative 2124 would make participation in the Washington Cares program voluntary, effectively killing it.” - Howard Gleckman, tax expert, Forbes
WA’s long-term care benefit is “affecting small businesses” (04:37). In fact, I-2124 will hurt small businesses by forcing workers, especially women, to cut back on their hours or even leave their jobs, to care for spouses, parents or in-laws because their family members no longer have long-term care benefits that pay for homecare aides or other assistance.
“You can find a long-term care insurance program that works better for you … and is more affordable for you.” (05:36) The fact that under I-2124 most of us will be left with no long-term care coverage. About half of us have a pre-existing condition like cancer, high blood pressure, or diabetes and will be denied private insurance. And even if we’re perfectly healthy, only people with wealth can afford the high premiums (about $7,000 per year for a healthy middle-aged couple).
“If you take a few years off to raise a family or go to another state to work and you come back to Washington state, you have to essentially start over.” (4:50). This is misinformation. Lawmakers added portability this past session, meaning you can keep your long term care benefit even if you move out of state someday for work, family or retirement. Under I-2124, your only option will be expensive private insurance and if you miss even one payment, even by accident, you could lose thousands of dollars and your coverage.
The truth is 80% of women return to work within 1 year of having a child. I-2124 takes away benefits from women who:
work part-time, just 10 hours per week, to qualify for Washington’s long-term care coverage, even for just 3 of the last 6 years.
work for 10 years (consecutive or sporadic, part-time or full-time) to qualify for full benefits during their lifetimes.
5. WA’s long-term care benefit was “kind of thrown onto the voters in an unsuspecting way” (04:13). In fact, Washington’s long term care benefit program is the result of more than a decade of work by our state’s Long Term Services and Supports Commission, engaging with hundreds of stakeholders including long term care finance and policy and actuarial experts, public health and consumer groups. 14 other states have undertaken similar initiatives to address the need to expand access to long term care resources and services. Following the creation of the program in 2019, the Long Term Services & Support Commission held 27 public comment meetings to gather public input on ways to make Washington’s long-term care benefits even more effective. And policymakers have implemented many of their recommended changes, including covering near retirees, part time workers and making the benefits portable. To date, no one has testified against any of these recommendations to the Long Term Services & Support Commission.
As to polling, reporters should ask for access to the survey instrument to understand how the questions were asked and evaluate the validity of the results. Other polling shows that a majority of voters oppose I-2124, especially once they hear the facts about who is behind this attack on long term care funding, and how the initiative would take away benefits from those who most need them - middle and low income families, and how the 50% of people who have pre-existing conditions are denied coverage by private long term care insurance companies.
Please contact us to discuss a follow up segment on ARC Seattle.
