Wal-Mart: On Notice...
ShareThis seems big: the MD general assembly has overridden a Bob Ehrlich veto of legislation that would essentially require Wal-Mart to pay more to provide health insurance for its workers.
Wal-Mart will seek to overturn the legislation in court. They might have a good case.
But the functional lesson here is that for the first time, Wal-Mart was not able to leverage its clout and its resources to bat away a challenge to the core of its business practices.
The pressure exerted on legislators by the anti-Wal-Mart forces -- Wake-Up Wal-Mart! and Wal-Mart Watch -- worked. This is their first significant state-wide victory. And it's a sign that the debate over Wal-Mart is a concrete political issue.
Wal-Mart, in its statement tonight, admits as much: "This was about partisan politics in the Maryland gubernatorial race.
It's a proxy for one version of a perennial economic debate: what do companies owe communities? What does government owe its people? What responsibilities do people assume when they accept employment? Is an employer-based health care system even possible in our modern economy?
Governors everywhere worry about spiraling Medicare costs; Wal-Mart is responsible for more of that line item than any other entity outside government itself. GOP GOV candidates will be quizzed about it, and not just in Arkansas. On the Maryland vote, GOPers wanted to sustain the veto; Dems didn't. The reasons were root-gut ideological: GOPers said the regulation could drive the company out the state, get rid of jobs and was fundamentally unfair. Dems said Wal-Mart exploited cheap labor to accumulate $10B in profits -- and was stingy in return. Gov candidate Martin O'Malley called on the company to step up (D). Incumbent Ehrlich (R) called the bill creeping socialism.
Expect Wal-Mart, already possessing a posse of talented lobbyists and PR professionals, to regroup and redouble its efforts. Expect the company to be more aggressive against the dissident groups. Expect them to be more proactive about their health insurance and wages. Expect the debate to itensify on the left about the usefulness (and moral correctness) of taking on Wal-Mart. Expect the dissident groups to raise more money.
Tracy Sefl, Wal-Mart Watch's communications director, said that as her group "made the case about Wal-Mart over the past months, and in particular, as we focused on just how woeful their health benefits were, the support for this override coalesced and now there is momentum in other states."
32 states have versions of this legislation in the hopper.
From Wal-Mart's angry statement: "We believe that everyone should have access to affordable health insurance. This legislation does nothing to accomplish that goal. There are 786,000 uninsured people in the state of Maryland and less than one-half of one percent work for Wal-Mart. Clearly, the legislators who voted for this bill have let down hundreds of thousands of Marylanders in need." [MARC AMBINDER]
Advertisement
Join the Discussion