Wal-Mart, in a letter about health care reform to President Barack Obama,
has endorsed an employer mandate, undercutting employer opposition to the
provision and delivering Democrats a key victory.
The letter, sent Tuesday, June 30, reflects the company’s effort to bury a
Senate proposal that would require employers to pay for employees who get their
health coverage with government assistance.
“Not every business can make the same contribution, but everyone must make
some contribution,” the letter said. “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 was signed by Mike Duke, Wal-Mart CEO and president; Andy Stern,
president of the Service Employees International Union; and John Podesta,
president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think
tank.
The letter went on to endorse a proposal to cut reimbursement rates to
doctors and hospitals should health spending rise too quickly.
This idea was previously raised in a paper by the Bipartisan Policy Center
established by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob
Dole and George Mitchell.
Duke met with senior administration officials Tuesday, June 30, to present Wal-Mart’s
views. The company’s stance reflects its opposition to a proposal, floated in
the Senate Finance Committee, to replace the employer mandate with a so-called
“free rider” provision.
According to an outline of the committee’s policy proposals that became
public last week, the free-rider clause would require employers to pay half the
average national cost of Medicaid for every employee who receives Medicaid. An
employer would have to pay the full cost of any tax credit an employee uses to
purchase health insurance.
An employer would not have to pay into the cost of Medicaid if the company
offered health insurance that was considered affordable. The proposal says
health insurance is affordable if it costs no more than 12.5 percent of a
worker’s income.
Employer groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American
Benefits Council have publicly opposed an employer mandate. But the introduction
of the free-rider proposal pushed Wal-Mart to support the employer mandate lest
the company be stuck with a law that would be particularly costly to businesses
with low-wage workers, such as Wal-Mart.
About 2.5 percent of Wal-Mart employees receive Medicaid, according to the
company.
The legislation from the Senate Finance Committee is expected to be released
after the July Fourth holiday. Two other drafts of health care legislation, one
in the Senate and another in the House, would require employers to provide
health insurance to employees.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a policy group whose work focuses
on low- and moderate-income individuals and families, said the free-rider clause
could discourage companies from hiring low-income workers and employees with
disabilities. People who are poor or disabled are eligible for Medicaid.
The policy group said an employer mandate was preferable because most
employers would choose to provide adequate coverage. The fine paid by employers
that choose not to provide coverage could help the government recover the cost
of insuring workers who do not get insurance through an employer.
Last week, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Montana, said his
committee had shaved about $600 million off the cost of health care reform. The
new price tag, $1 trillion over 10 years, would be achieved by taxing health
benefits and replacing an employer mandate with a free-rider provision.
The tax on benefits and the free-rider provision would save the government as
much as $718 billion, according to Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota and chairman
of the Senate Budget Committee.
—Jeremy Smerd
Workforce Management's online news feed is
now available via Twitter