Walmart, the largest private sector employer in the United States has announced that it will be raising its employees’ wages.

Walmart CEO Doug McMillan declared that his company would be undergoing a series of reforms that will affect many of its workers; the reform that is garnering the most attention is wage hikes in entrance-level positions from the current federal minimum wage — $7.25 an hour — to $9.00 an hour.

We are not hearing about these reforms because they may increase the standards of living for these employees or even because they could benefit the economy. We are hearing about them because they’re so politically exploitable.

Labor activists declared success at the announcement. For years, groups like OUR Walmart have been leading black Friday demonstrations and boycotts in vain. If they can show that their activism directly lead to Walmart’s present reforms, they can claim victory for their tactics and gain credibility.

Politicians have been quick to jump on this announcement. They argue that while the increases are welcome, more can be done. Since Walmart is a leader in the private economy, other businesses should follow. Minimum wage increases are politically popular, so if a politician ushers in a minimum wage increase, he gets to claim a political victory.

Much can be said about the exploitation by politicians and labor activists, but the most surprising and interesting of the groups that have exploited Walmart’s announcement to increase wages is Walmart itself.

Appearing on CNBC shortly after the announcement, Doug McMillan expressed support for a ballot initiative in Arkansas to raise the minimum wage. One can go back to 2005 and see the previous CEO of Walmart, Lee Scott, urging Congress to raise the federal minimum wage.

Since Walmart will soon be paying its employees well above the federal minimum wage, an increase in minimum wage laws won’t impact Walmart employees. That should lead some to wonder why they would lobby for a law that has no impact on its constituency.

The answer could be that an increase in the minimum wage would harm their competitors.

If there are two swimmers of similar skill, the slightly better swimmer has an incentive to get rid of his competitor. If the lesser swimmer can’t swim as far as the better swimmer, the lesser swimmer will drown, and the better swimmer will have less competition as a result.

In the same way, if there is an increase in the minimum wage, Walmart would survive it easily. Its competitors — smaller companies and family-owned businesses — could not survive a minimum wage increase unscathed.

Such a law could have the effect of consolidating and monopolizing Walmart’s influence in the retail industry.

With the minimum wage being such a contentious issue, it’s not possible for America to divorce the conversation about Walmart from the minimum wage. While this is entirely natural, all who pay attention to the discussion should be wary of the special interests of the voices involved.