Staff Reports
Washington state Democrats quietly approved roughly $19–20 million to replace lost federal health coverage for some noncitizen residents. But a new report says that money will cover only 173 migrants — not the 300 the program was first described to reach, and far short of the 1,200 advocates hoped to protect. If true, that is a stunning mismatch between promise and math.
The shortfall revealed: $20 million, 173 people
The reporting that sparked this mess comes from a recent local story quoting SEIU 775 leaders who say the state’s appropriation will cover only 173 people. SEIU 775 Secretary‑Treasurer Adam Glickman called the result “disappointing and frustrating.” State Representative Nicole Macri has acknowledged a much larger price tag would be needed to reach 1,200 people — roughly $100 million a year, by her estimate.
Where did the money go — and why are leaders surprised?
Long‑term care is expensive. Home care and facility care can rack up tens of thousands per person each year, which helps explain why $20 million may not stretch far. But here’s the kicker: the precise “173 people” calculation has not been posted in a public budget worksheet that reporters can point to. That means we’re left with a headline and a quote, not the math. If lawmakers and lobbyists knew this would cover so few people, they should have said so before asking taxpayers for one more dime.
Who’s accountable — Democrats, unions, or the budget office?
Democrats owned the vote and the spending plan. SEIU pressed for the program and now wants more money to “fix” the shortfall. Meanwhile, state budget pressures and deficits are real. Lawmakers can’t keep treating the state treasury like a campaign prop. Citizens deserve an answer: show us the fiscal note, show us the per‑person cost assumptions, and explain whether this was meant as a one‑time bridge or a permanent fix.
What should happen next
Simple steps: the Health Care Authority and legislative fiscal staff should publish the worksheets and assumptions behind the appropriation. SEIU 775 should release the calculation that produced the 173 figure, if they want to use it as a rallying cry. Lawmakers should decide whether to prioritize current residents and long‑term care needs — and if more money is demanded, explain exactly where it will come from.
Taxpayers and voters are owed more than slogans and press releases. If Washington’s leaders truly care about vulnerable people — citizens and noncitizens alike — they will stop the political theater, show the numbers, and make a real plan that matches promises to dollars. Until then, this $20 million headline looks less like help and more like sloppy budgeting with a good PR team.
