I'm encouraged that the debate continues, and that, hopefully, more people will read John Mackey's original, thoughtful, cogent, and intelligent alternative to the tyrannical boondoggle being whipped around by Congress and the present administration.
August is the slowest month for political bloggers, so to chase away the summer doldrums, several on the left have decided to gin up a retail boycott. The object of their wrath: Whole Foods CEO John Mackey's op-ed in these pages last week, presenting alternative ideas for health-care reform.
Perish the thought. The response to the piece on liberal Web sites has been frothy, with bloggers lining up to reproach Mr. Mackey for his transgression against progressive orthodoxy. A post on the Web site DailyKos called Mr. Mackey a "right-wing zealot," and his opinions "asinine."
To punish the op-ed offense, bloggers encouraged shoppers to stay away from Whole Foods and to spread the word through Facebook groups and store-front protests.
Those who actually read Mr. Mackey's piece may find the racket puzzling. The CEO suggests ways to reform health care without a new deficit-busting entitlement. He'd equalize tax laws between individual and employer-provided health insurance, make health costs more transparent and let people check off a form on their taxes to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to people who have no insurance. "Like food and shelter," Mr. Mackey wrote, health care is "best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges."
These are views held by plenty of voters, but no matter; the hardest cases on the left have had it in for the Whole Foods CEO for a while. Mr. Mackey drew the left's ire for his position against unionization in Whole Foods stores. Instead, the company adopted a raft of its own progressive employee policies, such as letting workers vote on their own benefits packages, including health savings accounts.
Too often, business leaders who have useful contributions on a public issue are too fearful or self-interested to say what they really think. Detroit CEOs paid lip service to fuel-mileage standards even as the rules destroyed their business. The pharmaceutical industry after years of defending its business model hopped quickly into line for the Administration's health-care reform.
Whole Foods is a publicly traded company, so the effects of a real boycott would mainly damage the pocketbooks of those nice Whole Foods employees and its stockholders. They may have little to worry about. Summer is nearly over and when the weekend farmers markets close, a real protest would require the store's hyperprogressive customers to withdraw forever from the Whole Foods community to get their artisanal foods at the supermarket chain down the block.
Meantime, Mr. Mackey's piece has stirred a conversation about health care among people whose first instinct isn't political thuggery. Whole Foods' Web site has its share of angry customers, but they have been joined by many supporting Mr. Mackey's position. His piece has been among the most emailed articles in this paper the past week.
Mr. Mackey wrote his op-ed to join a national debate on a subject that will affect his company and employees. He deserves credit for exercising his right to free speech, no matter the risk this currently entails in our politics.
John Mackey’s Wall Street Journal Op-ed Encourages Health-care Conversation - WSJ.com
No comments:
Post a Comment