Small Business Resources, Business Advice and Forms from AllBusiness.com
 

On Health Care Reform, Who Speaks for Small Business?

Thursday, August 6 2009

As the debate over health care reform heats up, both sides of the issue are increasingly invoking the plight of small businesses to score points about the benefits or evils of reforms under consideration on Capitol Hill.

The lobbying has become so intense, it’s spawned a corollary debate that is growing just as heated -- who really represents small businesses?

Although a half-dozen or so groups are nationally prominent, the National Federation of Independent Business, better known as the NFIB, has long claimed -- and is generally accepted -- to be the voice of small business in Washington. But long-held assumptions about the group are under question, if not assault.

A non-partisan, public policy organization in New York known as Demos, issued a position paper last year challenging the NFIB’s claim. The full article by Nicole D. Kazee, Michael Lipsky, and Cathie Jo Martin, titled “Outside the Big Box,” appeared in the July/August 2008 issue of the Boston Review.

The authors paid due homage to the group. While NFIB is relatively small -- 600,000 members compared to AARP’s 38 million -- it is remarkably powerful, they noted. In fact, Fortune magazine has frequently named it the most powerful business lobby in Washington.

Of significance to the current health care debate, the article credits the NFIB and local Chambers of Commerce with dealing the “decisive blow” against President Clinton’s health care plan in 1994.

Fast forward 15 years and the NFIB is once again a leading opponent of President Obama’s proposals. Two weeks ago, the group sent a letter to House lawmakers opposing two cornerstones of the Obama plan, an employer mandate and a public health insurance option. For its part, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce also sent a letter expressing the same position.

The letter prompted the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a Washington-based think tank, to post a summary of the Boston Review article on its Web site, raising the question once again whether the NFIB truly represents small firms.

The NFIB claims it derives its authority to speak for small business through regular membership surveys. But the authors contend that the group has a clear ideological thrust: “It favors lower taxes; opposes minimum wage increases; and generally embraces small-government, free-market policies.”

Over the years, NFIB polls have uniformly reflected those views even though a variety of other polls suggest that small business owners are much more diverse in their economic and political preferences.

In various polls from the mid-1990s through 2006, for example, NFIB surveys claimed that only 25 percent of its members favored a government-funded single-payer health plan. NFIB surveys also routinely find that cutting taxes is among top small business concerns.

But a 2000 American Express poll found that more small business owners (82 percent) ranked “improving schools/training young people for work” and providing health care for employees (77 percent) over tax cuts (74 percent) and reducing regulations (72 percent).

In a separate 2008 study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 70 percent of small business owners favored government-managed health insurance purchasing pools, and two-thirds agreed that business should contribute to a reformed system along with government, the health care industry, and individuals, the EPI noted.

“Depending on the state, half to 80 percent of respondents agreed that businesses should pay something toward the health insurance of their workers,” according to the EPI.

In politics, researchers found similar anomalies. “On the eve of the 2004 presidential election, 95 percent of NFIB members said they planned to vote for George Bush, yet 41 percent of small business owners voted for John Kerry, and 39 percent of those were registered as Republicans,” the article noted.

In contrast, the NFIB endorsed 265 Republican candidates and only four Democrats in 2004, and 95 percent of its political action committee’s substantial donations went to Republicans.

By numbers alone, the NFIB also has scant claim to represent small businesses. Of the 27 million small business owners in the United States -- by Small Business Administration estimates -- only slightly more than one percent are NFIB members, they noted.

The authors concluded that the NFIB’s monopoly on small business issues is likely due to a more effective organization and a strategy that keeps “alternatives off the agenda.”

“As our analysis suggests, and experiences in Washington and the nation’s state capitals repeatedly reveal, the appeal of small business has been appropriated by a powerful interest group that does not fully represent the views of small business owners,” they added.

Not all small business groups, however, toe the NFIB line. The Main Street Alliance was founded last year and is building a network of state small business coalitions specifically to provide an alternative voice for small businesses on health care. Another non-partisan group, the Small Business Majority, is also working to enact health care reforms.

Lloyd Chapman, founder and president of the American Small Business League, has frequently taken an independent stance on issues, often contrary to the NFIB and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. And the National Small Business Association also offers alternative views.

Health care is such lightning rod issue, when all is said and done, it could redefine the political landscape about who truly represents the best interests of the nation’s entrepreneurs. But one thing is certain, small businesses are far from monolithic, and no single group can rightly claim to speak for them in the current debate.

In addition, make sure to read these articles:

Latest Comments on this post

Girard's piece ignores NFIB's ceaseless participation in bipartisan healthcare efforts. With a quick glance at our Web site, which is certainly not hard to find (www.NFIB.com), he could have found our positions and research on healthcare reform. And, even easier, he could have contacted us directly (as most reporters would) and learned firsthand about our research and positions. Instead, I?ll set the record straight.

NFIB has been and remains a constructive participant in the healthcare debate. Sens. Kennedy and Enzi involved NFIB deeply in the HELP Committee's reform efforts. NFIB continues to participate in the Finance Committee's process led by Sens. Baucus and Grassley. NFIB helped a bipartisan group of senators, led by Dick Durbin, to craft the SHOP Act. NFIB played a key role in producing the Kennedy-Enzi information technology bill. Make no mistake -- NFIB's members AREN'T against reform; they are against BAD reform, which is all that currently exists in legislative language.

Girard's sources, Boston Review, Demos, and the Economic Policy Institute are ideologically bolted together far from the political center. And his use of statistics is, shall we say, "interesting." The 2000 American Express poll? Not sure whether it was scientific, but the findings sound pretty much like NFIB to me.

Curiously, Girard says the poll's #2 priority was "providing health care for employees," but the only references to the poll I can find on the Web say the #2 priority was "affordable healthcare for employees" and the #3 priority was "affordable healthcare for business owners" ... almost the exact words NFIB uses. Unless I'm mistaken, Girard retroactively edited someone else's nine-year-old poll language to validate his own position. Nearly 3/4 of businesses in this poll cite tax cuts and less regulation as very important. (Sounds like NFIB again.)

His coverage of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's research would have been better served by looking at the research himself. Had he done that, he would have learned that RWJ asked only certain business owners about contribution requirements (owners that already provided/contributed to health insurance). Any researcher worth his salt would understand how this sample skews the findings.

To claim, as Girard does, that Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority (SBM) are "non-partisan" is both irresponsible and inaccurate. Most recently, the New York Times (hardly a bastion of conservative information) refused to cover the SBM poll because they determined it didn't meet their standards as legitimate research. At the same time, they did cover an NFIB poll, where a politically neutral pollster queried a sample of 500 NFIB members AND a control sample of 500 firms chosen randomly from Dun and Bradstreet's files. Girard would be surprised to learn that the NFIB members and the randomly chosen firms gave nearly identical opinions.

The simple fact remains, small businesses need healthcare reform - no one has said that louder than us. And, NFIB will continue to represent what our members tell us they want out of reform - lower costs, easier access and more competition. It's not about "toeing the line." It's about being transparent in your positions, legitimate in your research and member-driven at the end of the day. I'm proud to say NFIB is all of these.
By: Dr. Bob Graboyes, Senior Healthcare Advisor, NFIB on 8/7/09 at 4:19 PM
On Health Care Reform, Who Speaks for Small Business?
You must sign-in or sign-up to comment on this post.

Browse All Blog Categories

Interactive Blogger Map
Use our interactive map to figure out where Bloggers are located

View AllBusiness Bloggers in a larger map
Small Business Expert
rlesonsky_80
Ask Rieva Lesonsky, Our
Small Business Expert,
Your Question
B2B Sales Expert
jkonrath_80
Ask Jill Konrath, Our
B2B Sales Expert,
Your Question
Finance Expert
sthacker_80
Ask Sam Thacker, Our
Finance Expert,
Your Question
Invention Expert
Ask Stephen Key, Our
Expert on Licensing Your
Invention, a Question