Remember when Gov. Gregoire said the state’s Basic Health plan, which covers tens of thousands of low-income residents, was going to have to be cut entirely to help cover Washington’s $2.6 billion budget shortfall? And then remember when she said it could be saved?
A person could be forgiven for feeling a little jerked around—or, at least, a bit led around by the nose—over the last two months with this on-again, off-again, still-purely-hypothetical Basic Health cliffhanger.
But there’s no resolution yet.
Yes, the governor has proposed a budget that includes money to keep Basic Health going. But, says Sandeep Kaushik, spokesman for the coalition Rebuilding Our Economic Future, which is fighting to keep “core programs” like Basic Health funded…
The question on the table is: Will the legislature raise revenue so these core services can be preserved? The funding for these core programs has not been identified yet. There have been what I would call very strong and positive statements by the governor and state leaders saying these kinds of cuts are not in keeping with the values of our state. She’s absolutely right about that. But that does mean that these programs are in any way safe until the program is actually funded and approved.
In other words, a few things have to happen before we know whether the legislature will come up with the money to save Basic Health. First, the legislature has to suspend I-960 (as discussed yesterday). Then it has to pass whatever money-saving and tax-loophole-closing measures it can think of to show that it’s not turning to “revenue increases” (aka taxes) as a first resort. And then… it’s probably going to have to raise taxes.
“There’s not going to be any other way to do it,” says Kaushik. “Revenue is going to have to be part of the equation.”
Once we know how much revenue is being raised (aka how much taxes are being increased), then we’ll know whether Basic Health will continue to exist.
No one, and I do mean NO ONE has ever asked the REAL WORLD question “What would happen if we had medicare for all citizens as a single payer public option right now?”
That would cut out the 30 percent overhead that lets the insurance CEOs jet around the world on your dime.
Would it let the US compete on a level playing field with the other capitalist first world nations? Or would the America-hating Republic Party of No comrades run screaming back to their homelands in Russia instead?
@1: As somebody who would not have health care if Basic Health is cut, I feel comfortable saying: Fuck you.
#1 — That’s my question. If the budget gets reduced, then yes, you have to cut some programs. But it’s like she uses the same shortfall over and over again to try and raise taxes beyond what they were!!
I’m all for feeding and schooling kids and giving people low cost health care — but then she throws in Brightwater, Viaduct Tunnels and 520 reworks as “must haves” when at the same time she says she can’t feed the kids — well, I think we’re being snookered!
Sargon @ 1: I did ask that question, and I even calculated the answer, and I did it all on SLOG just a few months ago right here.
In case you’re interested, the answer is that things would go back to that state of ruin that prevailed when the state provided that attrociously low level of services that it did in… 2006.