A Washington Times op-ed exposes this fairly standard democratic tactic of economic demagoguery.

Originally called the Fair Share Health Care Act, the Wal-Mart bill would have required companies with more than 10,000 employees in Maryland to spend at least 8 percent of payroll on health care or else contribute to a state fund for the uninsured. If that sounds “progressive,” it isn’t. Only one company met the criteria, and it was Wal-Mart, the bete noir of liberals voters everywhere, which employs 16,000 in the state. Meanwhile, hidden in plain sight last year were the approximately 800,000 Marylanders not employed at Wal-Mart who lack adequate health care. They received nothing from the political circus surrounding this bill. They continue to be underinsured.

Of course, the bill’s Democratic backers were much happier to wear the reformer’s white hat and discuss the evil of a company from Arkansas that dares to open its doors in Maryland — all the while letting union bosses all too happy to finance this charade fill their electoral coffers. That’s much more congenial for Democrats in an election year. The statesman’s option, after all, would have been much more difficult. It is never easy to speak frankly about the fiscal choices that any real reform of Maryland’s health-care system requires. Attacking Wal-Mart is a free lunch.

. . . Here’s what this pointless debate has gotten Marylanders: Electoral victories for Democrats, a continuation of the health-care crisis, time and money wasted in two federal courts and another round of battering for the state’s already sub-optimal reputation as a place to do business. With leadership like this, no wonder state Democrats need a big multinational to demonize.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS