Fair Share Health Care Act: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Horologium (talk | contribs) Fixed dead links with archive linksand fleshed out a bare link; arranged similar bills in proper chronological order and noted which state had the bill defeated. |
Horologium (talk | contribs) fixed cite needed by adding additional link to already-cited reference; tweaked ref template formatting. |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[Maryland Senate]] Bill 790, known as the '''Fair Share Health Care Act''', also nicknamed the ''"Wal-Mart Bill"'', was a legislative act passed in the state of [[Maryland]] in 2005. The act would have required for-profit employers with more than 10,000 workers in the state of Maryland to spend at least 8% of their payroll on employee health benefits or make a contribution to the state's insurance program for the poor. Non-profit employers were required to do the same, but with a lower, 6% benchmark. |
[[Maryland Senate]] Bill 790, known as the '''Fair Share Health Care Act''', also nicknamed the ''"Wal-Mart Bill"'', was a legislative act passed in the state of [[Maryland]] in 2005. The act would have required for-profit employers with more than 10,000 workers in the state of Maryland to spend at least 8% of their payroll on employee health benefits or make a contribution to the state's insurance program for the poor. Non-profit employers were required to do the same, but with a lower, 6% benchmark. |
||
The Maryland legislature initially passed the bill on April 5, 2005.<ref>{{cite news |title=Md. Passes Rules on Wal-Mart Insurance |work=The Washington Post |date=April 6, 2005 |page=A01 |last= Wagner |first=John; Barbaro, Michael |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28219-2005Apr5.html }}</ref> Though its supporters contended that it did not single out [[Walmart|Wal-Mart]], Wal-Mart was the only private, for-profit employer in the state that would have been affected. |
The Maryland legislature initially passed the bill on April 5, 2005.<ref>{{cite news |title=Md. Passes Rules on Wal-Mart Insurance |work=The Washington Post |date=April 6, 2005 |page=A01 |last= Wagner |first=John; Barbaro, Michael |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28219-2005Apr5.html }}</ref> Though its supporters contended that it did not single out [[Walmart|Wal-Mart]], Wal-Mart was the only private, for-profit employer in the state that would have been affected.<ref name=heartland /> |
||
The bill was vetoed by then-Governor [[Robert L. Ehrlich]]<ref>{{cite news |title=Maryland first to OK 'Wal-Mart bill' |date=January 13, 2006 |work=USA Today |first=Stephanie |last=Armour |url=http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2006-01-12-walmart-maryland_x.htm }}</ref> On January 12, 2006, the Senate decided to override Ehrlich's veto, thereby passing the act into law.<ref>{{cite news |title=Md. Legislature Overrides Veto on Wal-Mart Bill |work=The Washington Post |date=January 13, 2006 |first=John |last=Wagner |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/12/AR2006011201251.html }}</ref><ref>{{cite |
The bill was vetoed by then-Governor [[Robert L. Ehrlich]]<ref>{{cite news |title=Maryland first to OK 'Wal-Mart bill' |date=January 13, 2006 |work=USA Today |first=Stephanie |last=Armour |url=http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2006-01-12-walmart-maryland_x.htm }}</ref> On January 12, 2006, the Senate decided to override Ehrlich's veto, thereby passing the act into law.<ref>{{cite news |title=Md. Legislature Overrides Veto on Wal-Mart Bill |work=The Washington Post |date=January 13, 2006 |first=John |last=Wagner |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/12/AR2006011201251.html }}</ref><ref name=heartland>{{cite web |title=Md. Enacts 'Wal-Mart' Bill |date=March 1, 2006 |first=Michael |last=Coulter |publisher=[[The Heartland Institute]] |url=http://www.heartland.org/publications/health%20care/article/18577/Md_Enacts_WalMart_Bill.html }}</ref> |
||
On July 18, 2006, federal judge [[J. Frederick Motz]] struck down the law as preempted by [[ERISA]]. On January 17, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the decision.<ref>{{cite news |title=Appeals Court Rules for Wal-Mart in Maryland Health Care Case |first=Michael |last=Barbaro |work=New York Times |date=January 18, 2007 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/business/18walmart.html }}</ref> |
On July 18, 2006, federal judge [[J. Frederick Motz]] struck down the law as preempted by [[ERISA]]. On January 17, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the decision.<ref>{{cite news |title=Appeals Court Rules for Wal-Mart in Maryland Health Care Case |first=Michael |last=Barbaro |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=January 18, 2007 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/business/18walmart.html }}</ref> |
||
==Similar measures== |
==Similar measures== |
||
While the Maryland bill drew the most national media attention, similar measures were considered in other states but also failed. |
While the Maryland bill drew the most national media attention, similar measures were considered in other states but also failed. |
||
In February 2006, a version of the bill that would have required companies with 5,000 or more employees to spend 9% of their payroll on health care benefits was defeated in [[Washington (state)|Washington]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Wal-Mart bill likely dead; unions upset with Chopp |work= |
In February 2006, a version of the bill that would have required companies with 5,000 or more employees to spend 9% of their payroll on health care benefits was defeated in [[Washington (state)|Washington]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Wal-Mart bill likely dead; unions upset with Chopp |work=[[The Seattle Times]] |date=February 15, 2006 |first=Ralph |last=Thomas |url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002806194_walmart15m.html |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20060426110936/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002806194_walmart15m.html |archivedate=April 26, 2006}}</ref> |
||
In June of the same year, a similar bill was vetoed by the governor of [[Colorado]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/government/article/0,2777,DRMN_23906_4748013,00.html |title='Wal-Mart', after-school bills vetoed by Gov. Owens |date=June 3, 2006 |last=Fong |first=Tillie |work= |
In June of the same year, a similar bill was vetoed by the governor of [[Colorado]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/government/article/0,2777,DRMN_23906_4748013,00.html |title='Wal-Mart', after-school bills vetoed by Gov. Owens |date=June 3, 2006 |last=Fong |first=Tillie |work=[[Rocky Mountain News]] |archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20060614034134/http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/government/article/0,2777,DRMN_23906_4748013,00.html |archivedate=June 14, 2006}}</ref> |
||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
Revision as of 19:18, 25 August 2015
| Healthcare in the United States |
|---|
Maryland Senate Bill 790, known as the Fair Share Health Care Act, also nicknamed the "Wal-Mart Bill", was a legislative act passed in the state of Maryland in 2005. The act would have required for-profit employers with more than 10,000 workers in the state of Maryland to spend at least 8% of their payroll on employee health benefits or make a contribution to the state's insurance program for the poor. Non-profit employers were required to do the same, but with a lower, 6% benchmark.
The Maryland legislature initially passed the bill on April 5, 2005.[1] Though its supporters contended that it did not single out Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart was the only private, for-profit employer in the state that would have been affected.[2]
The bill was vetoed by then-Governor Robert L. Ehrlich[3] On January 12, 2006, the Senate decided to override Ehrlich's veto, thereby passing the act into law.[4][2]
On July 18, 2006, federal judge J. Frederick Motz struck down the law as preempted by ERISA. On January 17, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the decision.[5]
Similar measures
While the Maryland bill drew the most national media attention, similar measures were considered in other states but also failed.
In February 2006, a version of the bill that would have required companies with 5,000 or more employees to spend 9% of their payroll on health care benefits was defeated in Washington.[6]
In June of the same year, a similar bill was vetoed by the governor of Colorado.[7]
External links
- Details of the Fair Share Health Care Act. Maryland General Assembly.
References
- ^ Wagner, John; Barbaro, Michael (April 6, 2005). "Md. Passes Rules on Wal-Mart Insurance". The Washington Post. p. A01.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b Coulter, Michael (March 1, 2006). "Md. Enacts 'Wal-Mart' Bill". The Heartland Institute.
- ^ Armour, Stephanie (January 13, 2006). "Maryland first to OK 'Wal-Mart bill'". USA Today.
- ^ Wagner, John (January 13, 2006). "Md. Legislature Overrides Veto on Wal-Mart Bill". The Washington Post.
- ^ Barbaro, Michael (January 18, 2007). "Appeals Court Rules for Wal-Mart in Maryland Health Care Case". The New York Times.
- ^ Thomas, Ralph (February 15, 2006). "Wal-Mart bill likely dead; unions upset with Chopp". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on April 26, 2006.
- ^ Fong, Tillie (June 3, 2006). "'Wal-Mart', after-school bills vetoed by Gov. Owens". Rocky Mountain News. Archived from the original on June 14, 2006.
 | This Maryland-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |