THE PORT ANGELES GLOBE: 09/21/17

Thursday, September 21, 2017

NEWS FROM OUR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION TO WASHINGTON DC

Senator Murray’s Effort to Reimburse Washington State Taxpayers For Child Vaccinations Clears Key Hurdle in Senate
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED 9/ 18/ 17 (link source)

(Washington, D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) announced the Senate has approved her amendment as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to require a major health insurer to reimburse 11 states, including Washington state, for children’s vaccines. The problem arose more than seven years ago when Tricare, which provides health insurance to military families, refused to pay for children’s vaccines provided by Washington state. Refusing to reimburse the state has cost Washington taxpayers over $10 million. Senator Murray’s amendment, which passed the full Senate today, would make vaccine reimbursements mandatory.
“Our state is doing the right thing by keeping kids healthy and making sure all children have access to critical vaccines, but it’s past time for Tricare to fulfill its obligation and stop expecting Washington state taxpayers to pick up the tab,” Senator Murray said. “I’m proud to be a voice for our state in Congress and fight for common sense fixes that affect the families I represent.”

After passing the full Senate, the NDAA now moves to a conference committee. Sen. Murray will fight to ensure her amendment is kept intact and signed into law.

Sens. Murray, Cantwell Secure Protections for Hanford Workers in National Defense Authorization Act
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED 9/ 18/ 17 (link source)

Washington, D.C. – Today, Ranking Member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee Patty Murray (D-WA), and Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Maria Cantwell (D-WA), secured the reauthorization of the Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health as an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The NDAA passed 89-8.

The Advisory Board is instrumental in helping improve the federal compensation process for Hanford workers to gain the health care and benefits they have earned through their service during World War II, the Cold War, and the subsequent cleanup mission. Part E of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program (EEOICPA) provides current and former workers’ compensation and medical payments when exposure to toxic substances aggravated, contributed to, or caused the injury or illness.

“This program is critically important to current and former Hanford employees who operate in extremely hazardous conditions. These individuals handle the most dangerous radioactive and chemical materials, putting them at serious risk of injury and illness,” said Sen. Cantwell. “The amendment that Senator Murray and I were able to include will ensure we keep our commitment to protect and support all of the nation's workers employed in the nuclear weapons industry.”

“We have a responsibility to do everything possible to protect the men and women who work at Hanford, but there’s no escaping the fact that at the end of the day, the nuclear waste cleanup is dangerous work,” said Sen. Murray. “That’s why it’s so critical to make sure we have a strong, reliable program in place to help any worker—past or present— get the care and benefits they earned on the job.”

Congress originally established the Advisory Board in 2014 to assist the U.S. Department of Labor with Part E of the EEOICPA for current and former workers at Hanford and across the nation. The amendment would extend the Advisory Board’s authorities by five years.

Cantwell, Bipartisan Senators to Congress: Permanent Wildfire Funding Fix Must be a Top Priority
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED 9/ 20/ 17 (link source)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In the wake of historic wildfires in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, and across the West, Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Senators Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Jim Risch, R-Idaho, Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., Cory Gardner, R-Colo., and Michael Bennet, D-Colo., introduced an updated version of their bipartisan wildfire funding solution that would protect desperately needed funding for fire prevention and treat wildfires as the natural disasters they are.

The Wildfire Disaster Funding Act of 2017 would end the destructive cycle of borrowing from fire prevention accounts to put out fires and stop the erosion of the Forest Service’s budget by reforming the way the federal government funds wildfires.

“Fifty percent more acres have already burned this year than normal and the trends of the last few years suggest this will likely be our new normal,” Cantwell said. “The bill we are introducing today will stop the fire-borrowing that is currently crippling the Forest Service.”

“Oregonians and westerners are battling another record-breaking fire year. The threat of catastrophic wildfires is growing, yet the federal government continues to conduct ‘business as usual’ when it comes to fighting fires in Oregon and the West,” Wyden said. “More communities are put in danger and fire prevention work gets left undone because of a backwards fire budgeting system. It’s past time for Congress to make it a top priority to end fire borrowing, stop the erosion of the Forest Service becoming the ‘Fire Service’ and start treating wildfires like the natural disasters they are.”

"If you live in a community in the western United States, you do not need to be told that wildfires are major natural disasters," Crapo said. "With over eight million acres burned, ten states choked with smoke, and lives and structures lost, this year's fire season is a brutal reminder that we must start treating mega fires as the disasters that they are. Now is the time to both recognize that fires are major disasters and end the destructive cycle of fire borrowing that only makes the fire situation in this country worse."

“Wildfires have already burned millions of acres this year across the West, and the fire season is far from over. It’s long past time we treat wildfires like other natural disasters and allow federal agencies to pay for them like other natural disasters,” Feinstein said. “Our bipartisan bill would end the need for so-called ‘fire borrowing,’ where funding for fire prevention efforts is diverted to fighting wildfires, delaying or canceling critical prevention work. We must empower federal agencies with the tools they need to protect public safety and get ahead of what could be yet another catastrophic fire year.”

“The West is on fire, and it’s burning faster than years prior,” Risch said. “We need every resource available to prevent and combat the devastation caused by wildfires. This legislation would ensure those of us in the West can count on much-needed disaster funding.”

"Wildfires continue to decimate Western communities, ruining sources of drinking water, destroying property, and even claiming lives. Wildfires have all the qualities of a natural disaster, and it's time that the federal government treat them as such,” Hatch said. “This critical legislation gives much-needed relief to the Forest Service by putting an end to funding requirements that make it all but impossible for the agency to bear the increased costs of wildfire suppression. Ultimately, our bipartisan proposal will leave the Forest Service better prepared to fight forest fires and better equipped to prevent them from happening in the first place. It is imperative that we to return to a more balanced approach to forest management, not just fire management. I am confident that this bill will help foster safer, healthier forests in Utah and across the West for years to come.”

“The way we fund wildfire suppression today is counterproductive and crazy,” Merkley said. “As this fire season has proven all too vividly, robbing from forest health and fire prevention programs to pay for suppression only creates a vicious cycle of bigger and bigger fires. It’s time to fix this problem once and for all by funding fighting the biggest wildfires the way we do other natural disasters.”

“It may not be getting headlines in the national news, but wildfires have burned millions of acres in the West this year and the communities impacted in Colorado need assistance,” Gardner said. “I’ve been working to advance this legislation to stop fire borrowing for several years, and I appreciate the strong bipartisan support to ensure the Forest Service has the funds it needs for clean-up and prevention efforts while also finally requiring the government to treat wildfires like it does other natural disasters.”

“Catastrophic wildfires continue to plague the West, not only threatening communities and livelihoods but also draining the Forest Service budget,” Bennet said. “We need to restructure the way we pay for fighting catastrophic fires to mitigate and prevent future wildfires. This bill would end the practice of fire borrowing—a necessary step that will enable the Forest Service to make responsible investments on the front end to restore our forests and safeguard our watersheds.”

Unlike for other natural disasters, where agencies can draw from an emergency fund to pay for disaster response, the U.S. Forest Service and Interior Department do not have access to disaster funds and are forced to “fire borrow” – or steal money from fire prevention and other important programs already funded in their agencies to pay to put out fires.

Currently, federal agencies calculate wildfire suppression budgets based on the average costs of wildfire suppression over the past 10 years. But as fire seasons grow longer and wildfires have become more expensive to fight, Congress is forced to appropriate more funding to an outdated budgeting system that almost always underestimates the actual cost of fighting fires.

The updated bipartisan Wildfire Disaster Funding Act would fund wildfires as natural disasters and protect the agencies’ fire prevention budgets by putting a freeze on the rising budget costs of the 10-year average. It would end “fire borrowing” by allowing the agencies to fund any fire suppression spending needed above the frozen average through disaster funding just like other agencies can access disaster funding for tornadoes, hurricanes and floods.

Making disaster funding available after the appropriated fire suppression funds are spent would allow the Forest Service to use its fire prevention funding for its intended purpose – completing hazardous fuels reduction projects that have been shown to help break the cycle of increasingly dangerous and costly fires.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced last week that this year has been the single most expensive fire year on record, with fire suppression activities totaling more than $2 billion. Addressing the current, problematic system of wildfire funding is part of a larger need to stabilize and update emergency spending for all natural disasters.

Cantwell Blasts Latest Trumpcare Bill to Strip Millions of Americans of Health Insurance
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED 9/ 9/ 17 (link source)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) delivered a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate opposing the latest version of Senate Republicans’ Trumpcare bill, known as the Graham-Cassidy bill.

“[Graham Cassidy] is just one more sneak attack by our colleagues at kicking people off of Medicaid,” said Cantwell in her remarks. “Our job here has to be about affordability, it has to be about driving down costs, it has to be about driving down costs in the individual market and in the system overall. There is nothing good about kicking 15 million people off of Medicaid and sunsetting it in this bill. My colleagues are advocating the privatization of Medicaid.”

The Graham-Cassidy Trumpcare bill has key components of previous legislation, including:

Establishing a per-capita cap on Medicaid.
Ending the Medicaid expansion and permanently undermines Medicaid.
Rolling back protections for Americans with pre-existing conditions.
Allowing states to impose burdensome work requirements as a condition of Medicaid coverage.
Tearing coverage away from millions of Americans.
However, the Graham-Cassidy Trumpcare bill goes even further than earlier Trumpcare bills, including:

Repealing the Medicaid expansion, premium tax credits, cost-sharing reduction payments, and Senator Cantwell’s Basic Health Program in favor of an inadequate block grant.
Establishing a block grant for states without any consumer safeguards.
Creating a funding cliff that eliminates the guarantee of coverage in 2026.
A transcript of the senator’s remarks can be found below:

Sen. Cantwell: Mr. President, my colleagues have been out here in the last few minutes, last night, this morning, and this afternoon to talk about our distress of people trying to push again the repeal of the Affordable Care Act without a successful strategy to move our nation forward on more affordability. We just received a letter from ten governors telling us to slow down and work on a bipartisan basis, basically telling us that the proposal that people are trying to rush through without regular order is not the kind of thing that is going to help us make the reforms that are necessary. So I think that these bipartisan governors’ [letter], from the governor of Colorado to the governor of Ohio to the governor of Alaska, is something that the people in the United States of America should listen to because it's important that we get it right because the affordability of health care is so important.

What I don't like about the proposal that is now being pushed by my colleagues, even though they want the states to have some flexibility and play a larger role, is that it basically ends the 52-year state partnership that we know as Medicaid today. That is, it changes the dynamic that says the state and federal government are in business together to take care of a population that is the most vulnerable of citizens in our country and that giving them affordable access to health care is a priority because it actually reduces everybody's health care costs.

When people think about the expense in health care, you can ask any provider, they will tell you 1 in 5 patients will drive the costs. If you leave people uninsured, it raises the costs for everybody. We have seen states that cover people on Medicaid actually raise people out of poverty and help their economies and reduce the costs at individual hospitals, thereby driving down the cost of private insurance. So why would we want to destroy that by authorizing in legislation the end of this 52-year relationship between the federal government and states on trying to make sure that our populations are covered, that if a state spends a dollar, they can count on the federal government to spend that dollar as well as to continue the partnership that works cost-effectively?

What I also don't like is that it sunsets Medicaid for 15 million people. Sunsetting Medicaid -- if you're going to sunset this 15 million people, when will you sunset Medicaid for the rest of the population? When will you try by legislative action to curtail the opportunities for millions of Americans who use Medicaid as a stabilizing force for health insurance in America? In our state, 600,000 people, most of whom were previously uninsured, would then be set for that sunset of Medicaid. The legislation that my colleagues are pushing basically would end the funding for this program in 2027. So that would leave states with an unfunded bill for those individuals of over more than $300 billion. So I doubt that states have the money. I doubt that the individual market is going to take care of those individuals as cost-effectively as we're taking care of them and states will then cost shift these resources back to the cost of the public in raising everybody's rates again.

Our job here has to be about affordability, it has to be about driving down costs, it has to be about driving down costs in the individual market and in the system overall. There is nothing good about kicking 15 million people off of Medicaid and sunsetting it in this bill. My colleagues are advocating the privatization of Medicaid.

They are advocating that what you do with this population is take them off the current program and shift them on to the exchange. Now, some people who are following this will say, ‘Wait, they can go to the private market.’ The legislation also says that you stop that support by 2027. So this is just one more sneak attack by our colleagues at kicking people off of Medicaid. To start the process and agree to privatize Medicaid, where is it going to end?

Now I'm the first to say that we can improve our delivery system, that we can save money. I've advocated what I think one of the most cost-effective aspects of Medicaid is to move those who need care later in life off of nursing home care into community-based care. Our state, the state of Washington, saved over $2 billion over a ten-year period of time. If other states did this we could save $100 billion or more by giving states opportunity to age at home and have a long-term care delivery system that works in our communities. It is one-third the cost. Now that is innovation, that is cost savings, that is improvement on our current delivery system and hopefully covering an aging baby boomer population that is going to reach retirement and a population of Americans that are going to live longer. But there is nothing innovative about privatizing Medicaid and kicking people off by shifting them over to an exchange and then cutting the resources for the exchange. So I hope our colleagues will stop the notion that somehow this is innovation—it's not innovation. It's sunsetting, it's privatization, it's cutting people off of care, and that is why we have heard from these governors and others about why this is so important not to take this bait.

We need to make sure that we're continuing our bipartisan discussions, continuing to work together about what will drive affordability into the market. Bundling up a population and giving them clout to negotiate on rates and giving a state the ability to negotiate on rates, either on drug costs or on insurance, yes, can save dollars. It is being done right now in New York and Minnesota and it can be done in other places.

But cost shifting to the states, this $300 billion, or then making states make the draconian decision of, “Wait, I already shifted that population on to the Exchange. Oh, my gosh. The federal government just cut the funds that we're going to get.” Next thing you know this population is left without care.

Privatizing Medicaid is not the way to go. I hope our colleagues will continue to discuss on a bipartisan basis the aspects of the Affordable Care Act that could be expanded to drive down costs and increase affordability. I hope that they will continue to make sure that things like basic health – the essential elements of what should be covered in a basic plan – are there for our consumers. That somehow we're not going to take the bait in thinking that by cutting essential services to people that somehow is the way to get a private insurance plan. We have the ability to work together.

My colleagues and I have been working and discussing these ideas. My colleagues Senator Murray and Senator Alexander are working on various ideas in the HELP Committee as well as the Finance Committee to make sure that we fund the insurance and their families under the CHIP program.

Let's not make this worse. Let us not end this 52-year relationship that has successfully covered a population of Americans, and let's not fall for the bait and think somehow this is going to save money for the American taxpayer. It is not. It is going to cost the individuals, raise the individual rates, and we can't afford it. Let's make it cost-effective.

NEWS FROM OLYMPIA

From the Governor's blog page: Bilingual paraeducators bridge gap between student, teacher
Districts see enormous potential to help turn paraeducators into teachers
Blog posted on 9/ 18/ 17 (link source)

Paraeducators support teachers with classroom instruction and management. But as the number of students whose first language is not English grows, paraeducators who are bilingual can find themselves in another role: translator.
That’s been the case for Gami Diaz Lizama, a paraeducator in Highline Public Schools in Des Moines who speaks English and Spanish. He said bilingual paraeducators — often referred to as “paras” — help English-only teachers better connect with and inspire all of their students.
“Paraeducators are there to be the support for teachers, students and families, especially bilingual paras when it comes to a student and family that just came to the school and that only speak a certain language,” he said. “We speak the language (and are) there to help that bond.”
Bilingual skills are highly valued and sought after by school districts as they work to ensure public educators better reflect the diversity of their communities. (see full story from the link source)

WA DEPT. OF COMMERCE: $10 million in grants awarded to 23 rural Washington communities
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED 9/ 18/ 17 (link source)
OLYMPIA, Wash. – The Washington State Department of Commerce announced that 23 cities and counties will receive a total of more than $10 million in Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) for 2017. More than two dozen projects were selected from 37 grant applications requesting over $18 million. These grants are used to improve rural water, sewer, street and fire protection systems, support affordable housing and community planning.

“These infrastructure investments in our communities are crucial to support and sustain healthy local economies that work for all Washingtonians,” Gov. Jay Inslee said.

“These grants will help strengthen rural communities by addressing a diverse range of essential needs, from priority infrastructure to affordable housing and economic development,” said Commerce Director Brian Bonlender. “Commerce works closely with local government leaders to target strategic investments that will best support immediate needs and vision for the future of their communities.” (see link source for details)

WA DEPT. of COMMERCE: Washington state receives $900K SBA grant to boost small business exports
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED 9/ 19/ 17 (link source)
OLYMPIA, WA – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has awarded the Washington State Department of Commerce a sixth year of funding to help state small businesses grow through exporting. The $900,000 grant, part of the SBA’s State Trade Expansion Program (STEP), is the highest and maximum amount awarded from a total $18 million nationwide.

Commerce will use the funds to continue a number of successful export assistance programs for small businesses, including export vouchers, support for industry focused trade shows and trade missions, inbound buyer events and export training.

More than 580 small businesses around the state have benefited from about $5.1 million in STEP-funded support since the program’s inception through the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010. They have achieved over $512 million in sales, creating an estimated return on investment of about 100:1. Of these small businesses, 170 are located in 25 rural Washington counties – or almost 30 percent of all participating STEP companies.

“In the Pacific Northwest, we know that trade is crucial to growing the economy,” Washington Senator Maria Cantwell said. “The STEP program has already supported 2,770 jobs in Washington state. With these new grants, I am certain more Washington businesses will create more jobs by seizing the opportunity to increase exports to growing markets overseas.”

“The STEP program helps support hundreds of local exporters,” said U.S. Congressman Rick Larsen (WA-02) “and every dollar spent through STEP returns 98 dollars to Washington’s economy. This nearly million-dollar investment will help create jobs and boost Washington state’s small businesses.”

“Washington is the most trade-centered state in America and no other has shown a larger return on investment from our State Trade Expansion Program (STEP) work. Congratulations to our international trade team at Commerce on again being rewarded with the largest possible STEP grant to continue their outstanding assistance to our state’s new and growing exporters,” Gov. Jay Inslee said. “Our strong success doesn’t happen by accident – it is possible only when we invest in promoting our world-class products, our incredible ports and helping small and mid-size business access foreign markets.”

“One in three jobs throughout Washington state are tied to international trade, so growing exports has direct impact on strengthening communities all over the state,” said Commerce Director Brian Bonlender. “Small businesses need targeted programs such as STEP and the Export Finance Assistance Center of Washington to help them tap into worldwide markets. We use these flexible federal dollars to introduce new companies to exporting and help rural communities participate in our state’s trade economy.”

Bonlender added, “Commerce is eager for the Washington Legislature to renew state funding for these programs so that we can accelerate and expand services and support to small business as soon as possible.”