07/21/2006
A federal district judge struck down Maryland's Fair Share Health Care or Wal-Mart law earlier this week, finding it in violation of an existing law. NFIB led the fight against the legislation, which required Maryland companies with more than 10,000 employees to spend at least 8 percent of their payroll on employee health benefits or make a contribution to the state's insurance program for the poor.
Though the bill would not have immediately affected small-business owners, its backers also supported legislation that eventually would require all small businesses to provide health insurance to their employees—whether the business could afford it or not.
"We are pleased the court found Maryland law to be in violation of ERISA," said Elizabeth Gaudio, senior executive counsel of NFIB's Legal Foundation. "This has always been about forcing small-business owners to provide health insurance. However, the law did nothing to address the issue of access to affordable health care. Businesses that do not provide insurance do so for a reason; they can't afford to buy health insurance."
In March 2006, NFIB's Legal Foundation filed an amicus brief in the case, brought by the Retail Industry Leaders Association, asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to declare the law void because it is preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which governs standards for private health and pension plans. The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that states may not attempt to compel a certain level of employee benefits, nor may states pass laws that interfere with the uniform national administration of benefit plans.
