(upbeat music) - Welcome to "The Newsfeed."

I'm Paris Jackson.

There are four state initiatives on the November ballot.

Today we're analyzing one on the future of the state's long-term care insurance program, better known as Washington Cares.

It's Initiative 2124.

Since its inception, Washington Cares has sparked criticism.

We'll get into exactly what's on the ballot, and you'll hear from supporters and critics I talked with to help you decide if the program should stay as is or become voluntary.

It's estimated some 3.9 million workers pay into Washington Cares according to a state office financial management analysis.

So what is Initiative 2124?

It essentially is an amendment that would give employees and those self-employed the ability to opt out.

Here's Washington State Nurse Association President Justin Gill on why voters should vote no on I-2124.

A no vote would keep Washington Cares as is.

- This is something that people don't plan for.

They oftentimes don't have the savings for, and it impacts them in the long term.

You know, they have to either quit their job, reduce their hours at work so they can care for a loved one.

So this is a program that really helps target that and provide that safety net for folks.

- [Paris] The state collects $24 per month for the average Washington resident who makes about $50,000 a year.

That breaks down to 58 cents for every $100 on every paycheck covered on a W2, according to Washington Cares.

In July, 2023, the state began automatically collecting the tax after lawmakers voted to delay it during the pandemic.

Let's Go Washington, a conservative group, gathered enough signatures to get I-2124 on the ballot to make it voluntary.

They urge people to vote yes, which would allow workers to easily opt out of Washington Cares.

- If the program is as good as Washington Cares supporters say it is, it shouldn't be mandatory.

If it was as good as they've been claiming, then people would stay opted into it.

- Critics argue taxpayers may not use the full program coverage, stressing the benefit may not put enough money toward the potentially high cost of long-term care.

- That cap of $36,500 is just not sufficient for many people that actually do need intensive and comprehensive long-term care.

In most cases, that care will only last for three to five months at best.

And I don't know if that sounds like long-term to you, but it certainly doesn't to me and to our supporters.

- On the other hand, supporters of the program say making it voluntary will destroy its financial viability.

- If people vote yes on this initiative, it does not necessarily just make it voluntary, it will destroy the program.

I think it's very difficult to identify any kind of program or insurance program where it's successful when only the people that are higher risk and are gonna use the program immediately where that program is successful.

You know, I think that for Washingtonians, this is something that will reduce the overall cost of care.

We're gonna have less of those ER visits for those patients that have complications 'cause they didn't have access to care at home.

- In a few weeks, Washingtonians will decide if they'll vote yes or no on I-2124.

(upbeat music) We have a programming note for you.

We will not be airing our Newsfeed Washington Governor's race special slated to air tonight featuring the two candidates vying to lead the state.

We were able to sit down with former Congressman Dave Reichert, but after initially agreeing to an interview, Attorney General Bob Ferguson and his team canceled his scheduled interview numerous times, citing scheduling issues.

Because we were not able to speak with both candidates to give equal response to our questions, we decided not to proceed with the program.

And because of that, we will not air our special as planned.

I'm Paris Jackson.

Thank you for watching "The Newsfeed," your destination for Nonprofit Northwest News.

Go to cascade pbs.org.

Now to "PBS News Hour."

(upbeat music)