Thanks. Still, the following statement is misleading: "If approved, the retirement funds for all our state's public employees would be invested in Wall Street, hedge funds, and god knows what sort of investments."

Retirement funds for public employees are already invested in those types of vehicles. This is one of the reasons, though certainly not the primary reason, Washington has one of the best funded public employee pension systems in the nation (https://equable.org/unfunded-liabilities-for-state-pension-plans-in-2023/).

This ballot item would only change the investment protocol for long term care funds. The language in your article conflates long term care with retirement funds. 

John,

Your post implies that 8201 would change the way state pensions are invested. In fact, pensions along with several other funds are exempt from the restrictions of the state Constitution, as as stated in the explanatory statement: "The Constitution currently exempts several funds from this restriction. This exemption applies to any public pension or retirement fund, workers’ compensation funds, and money held in trust for the benefit of people with developmental disabilities, permitting those funds to be invested as authorized by law, including in stocks of private companies."

These allowances are made because the revenues associated with those funds would never keep up with demand if only invested in treasuries and other risk-free investments. 

8201 would add the Washington Cares Fund, for long term care, to the existing list of exempt funds. Like the others, it's revenues will struggle to keep up with demand. 

There is certainly risk to this exemption, but the program itself faces risk without this exemption.