The Washington Post on Friday examined the push from two labor unions in Maryland to persuade lawmakers to override the veto of Gov. Robert Ehrlich (R) on health insurance legislation that requires large employers in the state to spend at least 8% of payroll on health care. Wal-Mart is the only company in the state affected by the law. Affiliates from the Service Employees International Union and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union contributed more than $36,000 to 48 state lawmakers in the run-up to the vote last month, according to a campaign finance analysis report filed in January. SEIU donated a total of $20,570, while UFCW donated $16,050. In comparison, Wal-Mart contributed a total of $1,650 to seven state legislators. In one case, the check was returned. In a separate lobbying effort, the state chapter of the AFL-CIO said that it would not endorse any lawmaker who did not support the override. While the last weeks before the legislature assembles typically are "feverish ones for fundraising because Maryland law bans contributions during the 90-day sessions," donations from the two unions "were more than seven times what the unions had given previously in the month before sessions started," the Post reports. In addition, about one-third of lawmakers who received contributions from the unions had not received any such contributions before Ehrlich vetoed the bill in the spring of 2005. Robert Moore, president of the SEIU chapter serving Maryland and Washington, D.C., said, "Our members have given in greater amount to our political action funds because they understand the importance of the upcoming election year, due in no small part to what they viewed as a list of unpopular vetoes made by the current governor" (Wagner/Marimow, Washington Post, 2/10).

Nationwide Push
In related news, the Christian Science Monitor on Friday examined how "Maryland stoked the fire last month" in the "nation's growing debate about who should bear workers' health costs." According to the Monitor, "The stakes ... are hardly monumental. Even if the laws succeed, no one sees them as a cure-all for America's uninsured workers." However, lawmakers in 30 states "are taking a serious look at the fair share concept," the Monitor reports. The "pressure to contain surging health costs goes beyond the retail industry," the Monitor reports, adding, "Many U.S. employers have been moving to make workers pick up more of the tab, with higher deductibles and copayments." William Custer, director of Georgia State University's center for health services research, said, "Everybody can agree [the law] is flawed," but "trying to shore up the employer-based system seems to be a good 'second best'" to a wholesale replacement strategy. Thomas Kochan, a policy expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said, "At least it closes the gap a little bit between firms that are providing something and those that aren't" (Trumbull, Christian Science Monitor, 2/10).