Look below the surface

JAMES SIMMONS; Olympia | • Published October 13, 2010

As a business owner and resident of Thurston County, I was disappointed to read that The Olympian's Editorial Board came out against Initiative 1082. It seems our local newspaper's editorial board only looked at the "no" side of this issue when making its decision.

I support Initiative 1082 for many reasons.

The only thing I-1082 does is it takes away Labor and Industries’ monopoly on workers’ compensation insurance and allows private competition. Private competition leads to better rates and better service. Every state that has allowed competition has seen a decrease in premium and less litigation. The other 46 states (yes, that is 46 out of 50 states) that have allowed competition for workers’ comp insurance carefully regulate and audit the insurance companies, and I-1082 makes sure Washington state will, too.

This initiative will make Washington state a better place to do business. We need business to be successful in this state because businesses create jobs, not state monopolies.

Read more: http://www.theolympian.com/2010/10/13/1401894/end-state-monopoly-on-insurance.html#ixzz12UcMOwrj


With minimal research, I determined that Simmons is an optician.  My guess is that he might employ a half dozen employees at best, considering that the franchise/national operations don't hire much more than that.

My personal contribution to L&I is $2.70 per week and I'm betting that I get paid as well, if not better than most optical assistants.  The similarity in risk would probably put both me and Simmon's employees in the same category.

So, let's calculate what L&I costs one of his employees, based on the idea that they are paid as well as I am.

$2.70 is the employee payment (per week) to Simmon's match would be the same.  For $140 per year, one of Simmon's employees is protected for time loss AND medical expenses for any on the job injury.  As long as the injury is true and on the job, the bill is paid.  That $140 annual cost wouldn't pay for Simmon's auto insurance on his "company car" (all business owners own a company car, ask the IRS)

My contention is that Simmons is a shill for an organizational cause that wants to see insurance companies have one more way to make a profit.