Wal-Mart backs health benefits mandate

[Terri]

The Hill

With Wal-Mart’s endorsement of a legal requirement that employers provide health benefits to their workers, the nation’s largest employer has broken from the business community.

The so-called employer mandate is adamantly opposed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business and virtually every major business trade association in Washington. But the backing of Wal-Mart, which employs about 2 million people, could give a big boost to President Obama and Congress’s effort to levy such a requirement on companies.

Moreover, Wal-Mart declared its support for the employer mandate in a joint letter to Obama with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the liberal Center for American Progress, which is run by John Podesta, a close associate of the White House.

More

[Charie]

More broadly, the letter notes that the escalating cost of healthcare weighs more and more heavily on the budgets of businesses and the government alike and calls for aggressive steps to rein in costs.

Well, now, I'm sure the CEO of Wal-Mart is an intelligent man. If so, why does he think government will rein in costs? Government always increases costs. It's axiomatic.

Do these guys come out of college with their heads so full of liberal mush that they can no longer think of what's best for their businesses and our country? OR am I missing some sneaky maneuver here in which Wal-Mart will be making more money by having a federally mandated health insurance program?

I'm still thinking I'll do a lot less shopping at Wal-Mart. I shop there right now because it's the closest department store to us. Think I'll just drive the extra 10 miles more from now on.

[makamends]

I can't help wonder what are Walmart's choices here. Nationalization? Maxine Waters Retail Czar?

[Billary2004]

Charie-

Big businesses push these kinds of items because:

1) They know they can win from a numbers perspective. They can manage the costs of new regulations that will destroy other smaller competitors and limit growth in their industry.

2) They work directly with lawmakers to create the rules and typically create loopholes for their own business. Again, this inhibits competiton from new start ups and those without the money and leverage to work directly with the lawmakers

Essentially, this is corporate welfare. I worked for a corporate tax analysis company for 6 years and big companies hide behind the guise of doing what's right for the community. They could care less. They are in business to make money and I am all for that. However, there is no Constitutional means allowing for businesses and the fed gov't to be working together.

[AZ Patriot]

Billery2004: I was going to post on this but you stole my thunder. You are, of course, entirely correct. Many small businesses are just barely hanging on; requiring mandatory health coverage for their employees would close them down thereby giving more customers to Wal-mart. Make no mistake: When the founder's family sold the chain to corporate interests, many things changed. One of those was Mr. Walton's pledge to sell "American". Try to find anything NOT made in China.
I believe, for the reasons you mentioned, Billery2004; it's all about closing down competition and increasing its bottom line. I might also add that, given Obama's love affair with the unions, and since Wal-mart has vigorously fought unionization, maybe this unseeming support of company mandated health care is a way to not have Obama go after them to become union--a little quid pro quo...

[Engineer Scott]

May Sam Walton go after the current CEO as the Ghost of Christmas Future.

Scotty

[qrayjack]

May Sam Walton go after the current CEO as the Ghost of Christmas Future.

Good one, Scotty. Damn! Have I gotta find a new place to by groceries?

I saw this earlier and the forgot about it. What on earth is Wal Mart thinking? That they can buy off the union attacks? Dictator Obama fear? This is the last thing I would have expected from Wal Mart.

[elmerck1]

You can bet they have an ulterior motive for doing that.they have been the worst store chain in the country to pay low wages.

[qrayjack]

worst store chain in the country to pay low wages.

I've heard that said about them, but primarily by people trying to unionize Wal Mart. Their wages are competitive from what I've seen.

This Obama healthcare backing just seems very un-Wal Mart. Doesn't make sense.

[oldjules]

1) They know they can win from a numbers perspective. They can manage the costs of new regulations that will destroy other smaller competitors and limit growth in their industry.

They have 95% of their employees insured so they have it covered.