Obama antitrust enforcement..

Obama antitrust enforcement.. - Obama antitrust enforcement...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
By Jia Lynn Yang Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, September 8, 2010; A1 When President Obama took office, he promised to undo eight years of what he called the weakest antitrust enforcement in half a century. Consumer advocates held their breath for a dramatic shift that would hark back to the 1990s, when the last Democratic administration pursued a landmark case against Microsoft. A year and a half later, they're still waiting. The Justice Department's antitrust division has yet to exercise its signature power: to bring a case against a corporate titan suspected of abusing its dominance. In its other central role, as a merger cop, the division challenged in court fewer than half as many deals in 2009 as the Bush administration did in its last year in office, though the number of mergers also declined by about half. Instead, federal antitrust lawyers have eschewed aggressive litigation against big business in favor of a less-risky approach that works with companies to resolve anti-competitive concerns, according to many antitrust experts. "They're running a good shop. It's just not markedly different," said Albert A. Foer, president of the American Antitrust Institute, a research and advocacy group. "Anybody that wants to argue the Obama administration is anti-business or socializing America is not going to find much evidence in the antitrust division." A pattern is emerging in how the administration treats corporate America. In spite of some tough rhetoric, Obama has shown a certain reluctance to radically reshape industries. Rather than break up big Wall Street banks, the White House largely pressed to toughen rules as part of the financial regulatory overhaul. Instead of putting limits on how much bank executives earn, the administration encouraged federal supervisors to push these firms to tie pay to performance. A scalpel, not a cudgel Likewise, the antitrust division has shown itself more likely to use a scalpel than a blunt instrument when a merger has crossed its desk. When faced with mergers it worries will hurt competition, the Justice Department has forced companies to make some changes, such as spinning off a business line. But with one exception involving dairy processors, it has not gone to court to block deals, including the controversial marriage of Ticketmaster and Live Nation, the recent United-Continental airline merger and the union of the two biggest makers of voting machines in the nation. Some consumer groups said that the department's measures didn't go far enough and that they have been
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 03/08/2011 for the course ECON 602 taught by Professor Chugh during the Spring '11 term at Johns Hopkins.

Page1 / 3

Obama antitrust enforcement.. - Obama antitrust enforcement...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online