Wal-Mart Law Now a Loser in All 50 States

A few days ago I had the story about how the unions have tried to enact the Wal-Mart health care law in other states after successfully passing it in Maryland, and how the law had failed everywhere else it was tried. Well, now it's failed in Maryland too:

A first-of-its-kind state law that would have required Wal-Mart to spend more on employee health care in Maryland is invalid under federal law, a judge ruled Wednesday.

The state law would have required non-governmental employers with 10,000 or more workers to spend at least 8 percent of payroll on health care or pay the difference in taxes. The measure was aimed at Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which has been under attack by critics who say that its inadequate health care offering is forcing some employees to use state-funded plans.

U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz decided that the Maryland Fair Share Health Care Fund Act would have hurt Wal-Mart by requiring it to track and allocate benefits for its Maryland employees in a different way from how it keeps track of employee benefits in other states. Motz wrote that the law "imposes legally cognizable injury upon Wal-Mart."

This was a really odious attempt by the unions to increase Wal-Mart's health care costs at the expense of the low income shoppers who most benefit from the chains low prices. Of course, the unions have it in for Wal-Mart since they've successfully kept the unions out, so why not try and hurt the company through lefty politicians.

Score one for the smiley-face.