House speaker Frank Chopp (D-43), who scuttled so-called “retro reform” last year (legislation that would have prohibited trade groups like the Building Industry of Washington from spending a portion of state-funded workers’ comp refunds on political ads), may support a version of retro reform this year, according to an account of a meeting this week between Chopp and representatives of the King County Democrats, among other sources.
The “retro” program—so called because payments are made retroactively—works, more or less, like this: Companies in “high-risk” industries (restaurants, construction, etc.) form trade associations that pay collectively into the state workers’ compensation fund. If they end up having fewer accidents than expected, they get some of that money back. That money is supposed to be spent improving worker safety.
However, groups like the conservative BIAW have historically skimmed 20 percent off the top of the refunds for political purposes—funding, for example, a campaign on behalf of Republican gubernatorial challenger Dino Rossi in 2008. Additionally, miscalculations by the state resulted in more than $100 million in overpayments to high-risk “retro” groups. “Retro reform” measures would put an end to both practices.
According to an item in the Puget Sound Liberals’ newsletter by 2008 Democratic House candidate David Spring, Chopp told the group that he wants “to end the skimming of money from the workers comp program” and “limit the use of these funds to their original intended purpose, which is improving worker safety.”
Chopp, according to the newsletter, told the Democrats that the House will have enough votes favoring retro reform this year because of a report released earlier this year. That report, known as the Wyman Report, confirms that hundreds of millions of dollars were shifted into groups like the BIAW’s, and that tens of millions of that amount were spent on political campaigns. Chopp also told the group that momentum in Olympia had shifted toward retro reform, according to the newsletter, which also says reform efforts will be led by Rep. Steve Conway (D-29).
State Rep. Hans Dunshee (D-44), who supports retro reform, is skeptical that the House will pass much more than “retro lite” this session—perhaps fixing the problems that caused overpayments, but stopping short of prohibiting groups from spending workers’ comp refunds on political campaigns. “Don’t expect too much of that,” he cautions.
I have calls in to Chopp, as well as House reform supporters Sharon Nelson (D-34), Brendan Williams (D-22), and Tami Green (D-28).
Tweet
Wait a minute. We’ve had mandatory contributions to worker’s comp going to the BIAW?
So if the BIAW would support a democratic candidate this would be okay ? Look if the proposed legislation makes it cheaper for businesses to operate through the refund that is one thing. But if this comes down to who the BIAW supports that is entirely another matter. Seriously, the law is a problem because it allows the BIAW to support republicans ?
2, no, because that 20% does not go toward workplace safety. What it is being spent on just happens to involve Dino Rossi, he happens to be a Republican.
At no point did Publicola mention the Frank Chopp does ok by the same group, and maybe in all fairness Publicola should have.
You would know this if you read the Stranger.
Mr. Baker – has the 20% diversion been legal in the State of Washington ? If this is all about eliminating the “diversion” and that ultimately leads to lower workman compensation rates for businesses then by all means make that happen. However, if this comes down to a democratically controlled government in Washington State being unhappy with where the “diversion” is going that is kind of …well, hypocritacal and scary. You know, I don’t really put the Stranger in the category as an unbiased news source. I do read it but like with everything I read it is with a critical eye towards agenda.
Erica-when you appear on the radio with Joni Balter would you please say “this is Erica” before you speak. I’m having great difficulty distinguishing your voice and opinions from Ms Balter.
by the way- I finished reading Grant Cogswell’s piece in The Stranger today. The score settling over having the two billion dollar mass transit project he designed on his kitchen table thwarted by our local elite is really a joy to behold. Cogswell is clearly a political and artistic genius and deserving of a position here at Publicola.
I did not read Cogswell’s piece but it didn’t take the reluctant elites to bring down the Monorail. By the time the final figures came out, the Monorail would have taken 50 years to pay off and made the final cost roughly ten times the original estimate. That’s not even close to the normal cost/financing ratio of a typical public project. The real issue was a revenue source that just was not big enough. Joel Horn tried to make the case for the final numbers but they were simply too absurd by any measure. I voted for the Monorail enthusiastically until even my lame history degree told me the financing simply didn’t add up. If Grant is still upset about the failure of the Monorail he should seek counseling (financial that is).
“…a meeting with representatives of the King County Democrats…” makes this sound like it was some kind of closed-door session only open to a small section of KCDCC Delegates and chairs. Hardly. This was a public meeting open to anyone who wanted to come, as are all of the Legislative Action Committee meetings run by the King County Dems.
Chopp did discuss the BIAW, but that included defending his relationship with them, and claiming credit for every thing from childrens health programs to the sun rise. Nothing that was said there should be taken for reality, he was talking to a friendly group telling them what they wanted to hear, and said several times that his caucus hadn’t agreed to any of this yet.
Maybe instead of reporting on parties your “Nerds” should go to policy discussions too? At least then you won’t be relying on sources not known for their credibility.