Legislators are trying to figure out why a constitutional amendment involving long-term care funds failed
About 53% of voters rejected the amendment, Engrossed Senate Joint Resolution 8212, which only passed in three counties:
Sen.
"I think there was a lack of communication to voters over the intent and what it actually does," said Schoesler, who co-sponsored the bill.
Schoesler said he talked to one voter who realized after voting that he should've voted in favor but didn't realize at the time what the amendment meant.
The Washington Constitution prohibits investing most public money into private companies, though there are several exemptions, such as public pension or retirement funds, industrial insurance trust funds and funds that benefit people with developmental disabilities.
A Constitutional amendment, which is ultimately decided by voters, is required to allow any public funds to be invested in private stocks. In 2019, the Legislature passed a law that provided long-term care insurance, funded by a payroll deduction for
The premiums are deposited into a new Long-Term Services and Support Trust Account.
Beginning in 2025, a
The idea of the constitutional amendment was to allow money in that trust account to be invested in private stocks, which would likely generate more return,
The state investment board does not take a position on a program policy, but did release this statement:
"If the current resolution fails (as early results appear to show), state law will limit the investment plan to cash vehicles, federal, state and local government bonds, certificates of deposit, and secondary market commercial paper and corporate notes."
The money could also be diverted into the general fund, Schoesler said, but protecting it in the
Sen.
"We live in very uncertain times," Padden wrote in an email after the results. "The market has fluctuated a lot this year and a lot of people did not want to risk investing taxpayers' money into the stock market."
"Like a lot of complex measures that go to the ballot, when there's uncertainty about what it might mean, voters tend to vote no," Baumgartner said.
Schoesler said he isn't clear what the Legislature will do now that the amendment has failed.
"We're still waiting to see the overall outcome of the election," he said. "There's too many uncertainties."
------
___
(c)2020 The Spokesman-Review (Spokane, Wash.)
Visit The Spokesman-Review (Spokane, Wash.) at www.spokesman.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.



For Access Health CT, reaching those who need health insurance more difficult, more important in time of COVID
Before Buffalo speech, Cornel West says election was choice between 'catastrophe or a disaster'
Advisor News
- Tax implications under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act
- FPA launches FPAi Authority to support members with AI education and tools
- How financial planners can use modeling scenarios to boost client confidence
- Affordability on Florida lawmakers’ minds as they return to the state Capitol
- Gen X confident in investment decisions, despite having no plan
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- Retirees drive demand for pension-like income amid $4T savings gap
- Reframing lifetime income as an essential part of retirement planning
- Integrity adds further scale with blockbuster acquisition of AIMCOR
- MetLife Declares First Quarter 2026 Common Stock Dividend
- Using annuities as a legacy tool: The ROP feature
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- NFIB TESTIFIES FOR LOWERING HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS
- VITALE BILL TO STRENGTHEN NEW JERSEY IMMUNIZATION POLICY AND COVERAGE HEADS TO GOVERNOR'S DESK
- GRASSLEY PULLS BACK THE CURTAIN ON THE UNAFFORDABILITY OF OBAMACARE
- How to appeal a Medicare coverage denial
- Local seniors propose legislation
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News