Wal-Mart Says It Backs a Mandate on Insurance

[kpete]

Source: New York Times

Wal-Mart Says It Backs a Mandate on Insurance
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: June 30, 2009

WASHINGTON — Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private employer, joined hands with a major labor union Tuesday to endorse the idea of requiring large companies to provide health insurance to their workers, a move that gives a boost to President Obama as he is pushing for health legislation on Capitol Hill.

“Not every business can make the same contribution, but everyone must make some contribution,” Wal-Mart’s chief executive, Michael T. Duke, wrote in a letter to White House and Congressional officials, adding that he favored “an employer mandate which is fair and broad in its coverage.”

The letter was issued jointly with Andrew W. Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, which represents two million workers, many of them in the health care industry, and John D. Podesta, who ran Mr. Obama’s transition to the presidency and leads the Center for American Progress, a Democratic policy organization here.

But Wal-Mart’s embrace of the employer mandate may come at a price. In its letter, the company says that if Congress imposes a requirement that employers offer insurance, it must also offer a guarantee to business that health care costs will in fact be contained, perhaps through a so-called trigger mechanism that would impose reductions if certain spending targets were not met.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/health/policy/01healt...

[madrchsod]

1. walmart does nothing unless there is profit to be made.

mandates are a sell out to the corporations. ask hillary about mandates.

[iamjoy]

19. Mandates Are Only Fair

With proper support for those with limited income, a mandate (required coverage) is only fair. You can't have people decline coverage and wait until they have a problem to enroll. Of course, I think mandates must be tied hand-in-hand with waiving pre-existing condition exclusions. So, we get to the point that everybody has coverage, but if you need to change your coverage, the new insurance company can't discriminate.

[Abq_Sarah]

23. Or a competitor to destroy.

[grantcart]

2. I would love to be in the office of an insurance CEO when they read this

next step Walmart supports public option.


Once you accept a universal mandate a public option is in Walmart's best interest.

[cyclezealot]

18. It's the only way to apply competition to private insurance.

So, The public option is in the interest of every employer

[bemildred]

3. Back public health care or shut up. nt

[redqueen]

4. Yep... forget that 'trigger' nonsense. (nt)

[endarkenment]

5. It is of course in every large corporation's interest to support an 'all in'

system, as that should lower per-capita health care costs especially for organizations already providing this benefit for their employees. However, with a congress it seems bought and paid for by the health insurance industry, there is no guarantee that costs will be lowered at all, which is why a public non-profit option is essential, from day one.

[Puzzler]

6. Every business has something to gain if...

... the "playing field" is even.

[Vidar]

7. A mandate absolving Walmart for responsility for slip and falls.

[AllyCat]

8. I smell a rat. Wal-Mart is not in business to protect the little guy

I can't believe Stern has fallen for this, not to mention that employer-provided health care does NOT get us out of this mess

[Yupster]

22. Walmart has a better health plan than target

A mandate will hurt Target much more than Walmart, so Walmart is using the government mandate as a stick to hit its competitor with. Walmart doesn't do anything out of charity.

[Cleita]

9. Mandates are unacceptable they penalize the poor who can't afford to buy

insurance. I'll bet Wal-Mart will figure out a way not to pay but to get their employees to shoulder the burden. I worked for an employer who was pressured by the employees to get insurance. At first he paid for all the employees, but when new employees came in, he only paid for half their premium and, later just deducted the whole premium from each check for even newer employees. Pretty soon even the employees who got full coverage and then half coverage got their health care deducted from their check because employer said he couldn't afford it anymore but if anyone wanted to keep their insurance they could pay for it. I know this little shell game too well.

[hugo_from_TN]

10. The article explains they are in favor of employer mandates

not employee mandates. Thus all companies would have to offer a health care plan.

[Cleita]

12. Yes, that's what the article says. It doesn't say that they can turn

around sometime in the future and figure out a way to make the employee pay. I would venture that lower wages would be a result if they can't make the employee pay outright in the future. Beware of companies, who have proved their Republican bias by contributions, bearing gifts.

[hugo_from_TN]

13. If employers add the expense of healthcare it will be 'payed for' in one of 3 ways

Lower wages
Fewer employees
Higher priced products

One or a combination of those three.
TANSTAAFL

[Cleita]

14. They will not lose. That's for sure.

With Wal-Mart #3 won't happen but #1 and #2 will be the result.

[Liberal Veteran]

11. In other news, Wal-Mart announces ChinaCare, a 24 hour full service insurance company....

....bringing you bare coverage!

[juno jones]

15. They are playing a game of brinkmanship

Hoping that insurance costs will eliminate their competition.

That's all Mall-Wart ever does.

And I'm sure their policies for their employees (especially PT and non-management) will be those high-deductable, bare boned monstrosities that are offered to many service workers because they are 'affordable' even tho they cover shite. I guess they are so you can brag about being insured and after all that's all that really matters in this bogus numbers game.

Universal health care for all!

[liberal N proud]

16. Must be a buck to be made for Wal $ Mart

[dysfunctional press]

17. Walcare.

i got a baaaaad feeling about this.

[jmowreader]

20. It's obvious to ME at least why they put this out

Assume Walmart were to get its wish and all employers were required to provide healthcare to their employees. Two things would happen, and they'd both be in Walmart's favor.

Item one: If everyone has to provide healthcare, everyone's going to have to raise prices to cover it.

Item two (and this is the REALLY evil one): Walmart has something like 1.2 million workers. That's more employees than Target, Home Depot and Lowe's combined. Walmart is better able to negotiate prices than any other retailer, just because of their buying power. If Target pays $150 per employee per month, and Walmart pays $100...well, you get the idea.

[Dark]

21. The only reason they're doing this is because they know they'll have tod do it.

Thus, they want to make their competitors do it as well.