July 1, 2009 11:20 AM

Wal-Mart Supports Health Care Employer Mandate

By
Stephanie Condon
Topics
Health Care
1291980Wal-Mart joined with a large union and a liberal think tank on Tuesday to endorse the idea of an employer mandate in health care reform, setting the major retailer apart from most other businesses.

"We are for shared responsibility," Wal-Mart Chief Executive Mike Duke said in a letter sent to President Obama on Tuesday. "Not every business can make the same contribution, but everyone must make some contribution."

The letter was also signed by Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, and John Podesta, chief executive of the liberal group the Center for American Progress, who served as the head of Mr. Obama's presidential transition team.

An employer mandate - also referred to as "pay or play" - would require employers to either provide "meaningful" coverage for their workers or contribute to a public fund to cover the uninsured. There is debate over whether a mandate would help reduce the costs the government will take on to ensure universal access to health care or simply more deeply entrench the United States in an employer-based health care system.

"The idea is everybody pays in a little bit more to make it work better for everybody else," Peter Harbage, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, told CBSNews.com.

Many in the business community, however, contend the proposal would make it harder for employers to maintain a payroll with decent wages as well as the required benefits. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly opposes the employer mandate.

Wal-Mart was long notorious for its clashes with organized labor, although the store joined with the SEIU two years ago to call for universal, affordable health care in the United States by 2012. After recent improvements to its health care benefits, about 52 percent of Wal-Mart's 1.4 million U.S. employees now receive company-provided insurance, the Wall Street Journal reported.

In the letter, the company says its support for the mandate hinges on "the strongest possible commitment to rein in health care costs." The letter points to the cost-control mechanism put forward by the Bipartisan Policy Center, which would implement pre-specified targets for spending growth and enact a "trigger" to automatically enforce reductions.

"We are for an employer mandate which is fair and broad in its coverage, but any alternative to an employer mandate should not create barriers to hiring entry level employees," the letter also says.

Some proposals in Congress would require employers to pay for Medicaid for new workers.

Add a Comment See all 56 Comments
by Vistahealth July 2, 2009 5:18 PM EDT
The need for health care reform cannot be denied but is the term reform an accurate description of what is taking place. As an insurance broker , i do have a vested interest in the health insurance marketplace (www.nyhealthinsurer.com ) however i am very much aware that serious and concrete changes need to take place for the good of all. My concern is that the president is not interested in reform, rather the creation of a complete govt run health care system. An even greater concern is that medicare and medicaid have been riddled with problems and yet the govt wants to fix health healthcare.
Reply to this comment
by Waldo3k July 1, 2009 10:11 PM EDT
a few things:
1) Obama will not "ruin" AIG; AIG ruined AIG & Obama bailed them out with your moola

2) for all your conservatives who still believe in capitalism and competition: where were you when autocratic, socialistic/communist China was (and is now) buying up all our factories and decent paying jobs with the blessings of your pals in Congress who, with their Democrat pals, passed WTO, NAFTA etc.? Call it what you will; conservatives can no longer rely on a strong military since our min wage, parttime, no benefit, poverty level WalMart jobs can no longer support a government, let along the Pentagon (which continues outsourcing its needs for weapons and materiel.) Sorry - since Republicans began enabling American companies to outsource in the name of freedom, surprise! - we can no longer afford freedom nor a military to protect it!
3) Don't look now but the stock, housing, banking, textile, auto, electronics and many other industries have long since died in America. Not only are we unable to afford private health insurance, we can no longer afford public health care either...soooooooooo the only solution is: BRING BACK TARIFFS ON IMPORTS FROM COUNTRIES WHO PAY SLAVE LABOR WAGES, HAVE NO DEMOCRACY OR FREEDOM AND WHO ARE USING THE HARD CURRENCY (AND INDUSTRIES WE EXPORTED TO THEM) TO REBUILD AND MODERNIZE THEIR MILITARY STRENGTH.....OF COURSE THIS WILL CAUSE BOTH LIBERALS AND REPUBLICANS TO YELL "PROTECTIONISM" BUT WHY THE H_ _ _ DO THEY THINK WE SENT THEM TO WASHINGTON FOR? TO SELL US OUT AS THEY MAKE MILLIONS ON THE INTERNATIONAL EXPLOITATION OF LABOR AT THE EXPENSE OF FREEDOM. NOT COOL FOR A GOVERNMENT "OF, BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE," UNLESS YOU THINK CORPORATIONS WITH NO ALLEGIANCE TO AMERICA ARE "PEOPLE"....
Reply to this comment
by tenderloin July 1, 2009 9:40 PM EDT
Get real folks. Another reason Walmart wants Barry O involved healthcare is it will be cheaper for Walmart to kick in money to the government planthen pay for their own. It is as simple as that. We get screwed so Walmart saves money and in the near term looks good. No thanks
Reply to this comment
by AverageJoeLE July 1, 2009 9:32 PM EDT
This is a FRIGHTENING possibility for the future if ObamaCare fails in its current form. Obama may force us to take universal healthcare by necessity by ruining AIG. http://******/hNUSy
Reply to this comment
by ramos1129 July 1, 2009 4:37 PM EDT
I am a small business owner with 46 employees. I currently provide health insurance.

Universal insurance coverage is coming. That is a fact of life. As a small business owner, I can accept a current proposal that provides for me to pay up to 8% of my payroll for employee health care. Reasons? I believe in cash flow planning. If I have a definite amount that I know I will have to pay, I can make provision for that in my planning and my business operations.

I do not care what political labels some yoyo gives a plan. Whether it be labeled socialism, capatilisim or some other ism. The only true test of the health plan that emerges is, "Does it work?" If it does, let's go with it. If it does not, junk it.
Reply to this comment
by woeisme1 July 1, 2009 4:37 PM EDT
by mccain08nc July 1, 2009 10:54 AM PDT
All these comments are typical of liberals looking for something for nothing. They think just because they can call them selves Americans they deserve something paid for by other hard working Americans.
=================

Your assumption is that democrats don't work. Only republicans pay taxes you seem to feel. Do you realize how arrogant your statement is? Maybe because your a mouthpiece for Fox News it does'nt matter?
Reply to this comment
by frets3 July 1, 2009 4:36 PM EDT
A 'public option'...such bs. There are hundreds of insurance companies already, but the First Black President thinks that the answer to all that is wrong with health care will be solved if we get just one more. One that he of course, controls. Anyone who believes that another HUGE beauracracy will not have the same fraud, corruption, and built-in inneficiency that every other government operation has is simply living in a dreamland.
A few short months ago, I thought it could not get any worse than Bush. Now I know better. This Marxist dictator and his Pelosi minions need to be stopped!
Reply to this comment
by taxguydave July 1, 2009 4:55 PM EDT
What a laugh. "Hundreds" of insurance companies? Yes, if you count property and casualty companies. In health insurance, 5 companies control over 80% of the market. Most of the "brand names" that you see are actually owned by a bigger company (did I mention that I'm health insurance licensed?). For example, if you have a policy from Golden Rule, then you're actually buying your insurance from UnitedHealthGroup.

Back in the old days, that used to be called a trust. Which is illegal, by the way.
by woeisme1 July 1, 2009 4:30 PM EDT
Many in the business community, however, contend the proposal would make it harder for employers to maintain a payroll with decent wages as well as the required benefits.

=======================

And most in the business community get neither decent wages or required benefits now. So it strikes me as odd that those objecting would make such a statement.
Reply to this comment
by pensacola8-2009 July 1, 2009 4:25 PM EDT
This news from Walmart CEO Mike Duke is the greatest news I have heard this week and I am delighted and pleased to learn it.

A few weeks ago, while on vacation to Texas, I spoke about health care to my friends who own businesses and learned about their adamant resistance to implement it. When I confronted them and asked why they opposed the Obama Adminstration's health plan, they answered very simply, "We haven't been paying our taxes as a business and it kills us to start paying our fair share at the same time when profits have eroded to almost nothing".

What that has told me is that some who scream the loudest may not be playing by the rules in the first place....and most don't want to accept blame for their choices or problems it causes for others downstream.

Walmart used to be an employer that didn't hire many full time employees, or give benefits to many, but they have transformed theirself into a different kind of employer. Now, they are an ICON of civic patriots.

Full Speed Ahead with the National Health Care !!!!
Reply to this comment
by veils-2009 July 1, 2009 4:17 PM EDT
Wal-Mart has the worst record for providing health insurance to its employees. It uses tactics like giving people under 40 hour work weeks, which skirts their requirement to give full time employees vacation, sick leave and health insurance.

Especially in small towns Wal-Mart swallows its competition whole leaving people little choice in who they are going to work for. And with no competition for jobs, Wal-Mart holds even greater power over the people that work for them and even the community as a whole.

Up-against the Wal-Mart is the Hugo Chavez of the big box discount stores.
Reply to this comment
See all 56 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook