During a short but busy legislative session, Washington lawmakers this year made significant strides in addressing health care issues.
With the COVID-19 pandemic reviving attention to public health and to inequities in health care, the Legislature sent several important bills to Gov. Jay Inslee. But work remains; lawmakers must continue to focus on health care when they reconvene next year.
As it stands, a series of initiatives will help bolster public health, expand care for underserved populations and focus on specific health care needs. Millions of dollars have been dedicated to updating public-health data systems, enhancing cancer research and addressing the state’s opioid epidemic.
Attention to public health is particularly important. For decades, governments throughout the United States have given short shrift to public health, creating a system that was ill-prepared for a pandemic. In addition to bolstering that system, lawmakers added $125 million for the ongoing pandemic response — vaccine distribution, diagnostic testing, disease surveillance and community outreach.
Fortunately, they did not waste time on bills that would have restored employment to those who were fired or resigned over vaccine mandates.
The Legislature also lowered some co-payments for insulin and passed House Bill 1616, which will expand free or discounted medical care to low-income patients. That bill was supported by Southwest Washington Democrats and Republican Sen. Ann Rivers; it was opposed by other Republicans from Clark County.
As Attorney General Bob Ferguson said: “Under current law, a single parent working two minimum-wage jobs at 50 hours per week was not eligible for financial assistance at Washington hospitals — that’s not right and it needed to change.”
Despite laudable efforts that will improve health care for Washingtonians, lawmakers were unable to address other pressing issues.
Most notable was House Bill 1868, which counted Rep. Monica Stonier, D-Vancouver, among its many co-sponsors but failed to make it out of committee. The bill would have mandated specific nurse-to-patient ratios, among other items.
The impetus is an ongoing shortage of nurses, which has been exacerbated by many people leaving the profession under the strain of the pandemic. The bill was flawed, but hopefully it brought new attention to a serious problem. Washington and other states must quickly find ways to attract and retain nurses, and House Bill 2007 — which passed the Legislature — more directly addresses that issue.
Amid the urgency of those health care bills, lawmakers were unable to address a more long-range concern in the state’s public-option plan. In 2019, Washington became the first state to offer such a plan (the simplistic explanation is that it is a “Medicare for All” system at the state level).
The public-private partnership was designed by the state but is offered by private insurance companies. Two years in, it is available in only 25 of Washington’s 39 counties, and enrollment numbers have been low. Rep. Eileen Cody, D-West Seattle, who introduced the plan, told Kaiser Health News: “The plans had a hard time getting networks put together because the hospitals wouldn’t play. They’re a big part of the problem.”
Lawmakers will need to decide whether to abandon the plan or to legislatively strengthen it. That question will be among several health care issues facing legislators next year.
