Why Would Wal-Mart Support Mandatory Employer Provided Health Insurance?

Why would Wal-Mart embrace President Barack Obama's call to require all large employers to offer health insurance? This is the stance Wal-Mart has taken.

From The Hill:

With Wal-Mart’s endorsement of a legal requirement that employers provide health benefits to their workers, the nation’s largest employer has broken from the business community.

The so-called employer mandate is adamantly opposed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business and virtually every major business trade association in Washington. But the backing of Wal-Mart, which employs about 2 million people, could give a big boost to President Obama and Congress’s effort to levy such a requirement on companies.

Moreover, Wal-Mart declared its support for the employer mandate in a joint letter to Obama with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the liberal Center for American Progress, which is run by John Podesta, a close associate of the White House.

The reason turns out to be it would hurt their competitors more than them.

From Wizbang:

Why would they want a mandate? Read on to find out:

Wal-Mart recently said that 94 percent of its employees now have insurance, either through the company or a family member.

The law would not affect them, so endorsing it is a cost free decision. But all those other retailers who don't offer health insurance will find their costs going up. Grocery store chains like SuperValu, Kroger, and Safeway, department stores like Target, big box stores like Home Depot and Lowes, electronic retailers like Best Buy will all find themselves with higher costs if the health insurance mandate becomes written into law. Wal-Mart is just begging the government to impose a mandate on them that will cost them nothing, but saddle their competitors with a huge new expense. I can't wait until Obama says it's for the children.