Wal-Mart's endorsement of a requirement that employers offer workers health insurance is a reminder that while most employers may resist such a law, those employers who pay most workers already offer insurance and can thus painlessly support the principle.
About half of America's workers are employed by a firm with more than 500 workers - the percentage rises over time - and nearly every one of them is offered an opportunity to buy insurance. Only about six percent of them are uninsured. As firm size shrinks, the insured population grows, reaching 30 percent among those who have fewer than nine colleagues at work.
The big employers comprise less than one percent of all employers, but have ample political clout. They find an increasing number of reasons to find mandatory coverage attractive and the upcoming debate may further fray their already deteriorating relationship with the Republican Party.
Here's why:
1. It creates a more level playing field, imposing costs on their competitors who aren't now offering health insurance. That's why American Airlines took a similar stance more than a decade ago.
2. It lowers their costs. Insofar as the uninsured run up costs for care that are then shared by the insured population, any move toward universal insurance provides relief for those now providing coverage.
3. It solves a problem they have little confidence they can solve and decreasing enthusiasm. In an era where businesses are concentrating on what they do best and outsourcing ancillary tasks, fretting over keeping health insurance costs down is a distraction they have decreasing patience for. Business groups that once thought they could fix the system have decided the problem is simply bigger than they are.
4. It buys them a seat at the table. There are many ways to design a health reform program. Chances of influencing a design they'll ultimately be comfortable with are better if they are helping construct the new system rather than opposing it.
For reasons both practical and political, small business owners continue to be wary of such a mandate. At best, it will exclude them while making it more difficult to recruit workers who'll increasingly expect health insurance as part of an employment package. At worst, it will impose complex and costly new responsibilities.
While both parties continue to genuflect toward small business as a sparkplug of the American economy, this issue indicates a growing split within the employer community between the bigs, who are comfortable dealing with other big institutions and complying with a growing rule book, and small firms who are struggling.
If the health debate concludes with the American people seeing Wal-Mart -- which offers convenient in-store clinics, discount prescriptions and health coverage for its employees while championing such protection for all -- as the good guy and their neighborhood store that offers less selection and higher prices along with service from an uninsured workforce as simply old-fashioned and out-of-step, that could have a big impact on our politics in the years ahead.