(Washington, DC) — In a cynical catch 22 decision U.S. District Court Judge J. Frederick Motz determined that Maryland state government could not require companies operating in the state to provide adequate health care coverage for employees because federal law trumped Maryland’s Fair Share Health Care Act passed last winter.
The act required companies with 10,000 or more employees to spend at least 8 percent on employee health care or pay the difference in taxes.
Motz’s decision follows bizarre logic. Essentially it says because Wal-Mart acts uniformly irresponsibly nationwide by failing to provide adequate heath care for employees, states cannot enact legislation to require companies to meet certain responsible employee health care standards.
The losers in Motz’s decision are Maryland Wal-Mart workers—since Wal-Mart is the only large company that wouldn’t have been in compliance with the legislation.
Clearly, for Motz to conclude that the legislation would hurt Wal-Mart because it would have amounted to the company doing extra paper work in Maryland is more than bizarre and his decision should be appealed and overturned.
Motz’s decision puts the interests of the world’s largest retailer over the needs of Maryland citizens like Cynthia Murray who has worked for Wal-Mart for five years and still can’t afford the Wal-Mart health care plan. Wal-Mart’s irresponsible corporate agenda shifts medical treatment costs to taxpayers and responsible corporations and further strains America’s failing health care system.