Here is a statement by Washington State Senator Bob Hasegawa on SJR 8201.  This clarifies the issue raised by Forrest Longman - which does not affect the reasons for rejection 8201.  Also, here is a link to Bob’s full statement and explanation on this issue of investing long term care funds in the stock market. 

“Please Vote NO on SJR 8201, a Constitutional Amendment that changes our state Constitution to allow our Long Term Care Trust Fund to be invested (gambled) in the stock market. This proposal was rejected by the people 5 years ago but has resurfaced again, this time with a $1/4 Million war chest.  Other than that, nothing has changed to warrant adoption this go round.

“First, a categorical rebuttal of their Voters’ Pamphlet claims, which I expand on in the thread below:

“1) Proponents falsely state, “Approve 8201 to guarantee long-term care funds are there when we need them.”

“Response: The truth is No One can make such a guarantee, especially regarding Wall Street 

“2) They say, "8201 is a commonsense measure that ensures tax dollars go further.”

“Response: Gambling with needed tax dollars is not commonsense. The old commonsense adage is, “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.”

“3) They say, “Approve 8201 to increase funding without impacting taxpayers.”

“Response: If Wall Street crashes or falls short of expectations, our only recourse is to raise taxes or cut benefits until the market recovers, which can take years.

“4) They say, "8201 has overwhelming bipartisan support across the political spectrum.”

“Response: 8201 also has bipartisan opposition. That we are being forced to reconsider our previous rejection of this ballot measure is just a sad commentary on our times and the influence of money in our voting and policy setting systems.”

Again, for his full statement, click the link at the top of this comment. 

Janis, thank you.  I also wish I had put this article together two weeks ago.  But at age 84 I am now much slower than I used to be.  Those two article were exhausting.  In the end they held up but as others ove 80 know, one can get confused on the path towards the goal. 

Our daily newspapers should be producing these.  They do not.  I started NW Citizen 30 years ago out of frustration with the Bellingham Herald ignoring our need for critical information on our governments and for voting. The lesson learned is citizen journalism is needed to nudge the commercial media to do better.  Just why did the Cascasia Daily ignore the issues measures on our ballots?  Why? Maybe it is not click bait.

Thank you for the compliment.  

Forrest, you are correct in the details.  And those details make this proposed investment idea even more absurd and dangerous.  If funds are insufficient then we as a state need to look for additional funding.  The idea that the stock market can supplement our taxes is basically our leaders drinking the kookaid.  

Our legislature in Olympia has for many years prevented a state public bank from being developed.  That is the safe and profitable path to enhancing funds such as disability funds and pensions.  

In reply to first comment by Rick regards amendment #2 - hiring an ombuds person; you have a good point that the public currently has a challenge in reporting abuse and other types of issues.  And of the several very expensive proposals, this one has the most promise of actual value to us citizens.  

The 'but' that I have is that this is a challenge that the council and executive already have the power and authority to solve.  We can pressure our council and executive to create a safe path for grievances.  The charter is for structuring government so our elected ones have the powers to solve problems. The charter is not for solving problems tha our council and executive should be solving.  The charter review commission should not act as a proxy county council to do the things they think the council should do. 

The big problem with solving problems in the charter is those solutions are cast in stone.  Unlike laws passed by the council and implemented by the executive, they cannot be changed for 10 years if they are off the mark.  Actually they can be changed by the long process of initiative and public vote on the issue.  Not the way to fix things we know do not belong in the charter.  

The original Freeholders who drafted our charter were careful to not legislate in the charter.  They structured government, put limits on powers and specified powers and gave the people of Whatcom County the initiative process.  The charter commission is not a county council. 

A translation from the German of David Swanson's comment:

HolySchnitzel

Nowhere in the article did I refer to the National Guard as a Sturmabteilung. 
Although during my time in the army, in basic training and in parachuting school, we were in lockstep to chants of "NG no good, US, useless, RA, all the way."

There are probably no bots on NW Citizen - as we we all use our real names for articles and comments.  We try to verify each person who registers to comment.  Yes, we do turn down those who try to fake their name.  This practice reduces greatly the number of people who will comment.  Many have told us they would but for concerns about disapproval by their employer - be that private or government.  

Thank you B. Sadie   Bailey for your calm reasoned perspective.  

Richard, this article is about Homeland Security's ICE police, not the National Guard.  

The National Guard are highly trained soldiers and are NOT committing the abuses that ICE is.  You seem to be confusing ICE with the National Guard.  I think all of us on the left and the right do respect the National Guard.  They are disciplined troops.