The Sherman Antitrust Act was passed unanimously in 1890. Its primary purpose was to ensure competition exists within corporate markets. In theory competition between rival corporations keeps prices low and affordable for consumers. In other words, it prevents predatory pricing that may take place when companies have a monopoly on certain products and services. In 1914, Congress passed the Clayton Antitrust Act to add further substance to the language of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In 1920, Congress created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that is chartered to protect American consumers by enforcing federal laws including both the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts. For instance, the FTC would evaluate mergers and acquisitions of corporations to make sure the resulting company would not have a monopoly over a particular market. Standard Oil, The American Tobacco Company, and AT&T are all examples of large corporations that were broken up by Supreme Court rulings since they determined these companies violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.
It is not uncommon for the United States federal government to break its own laws. For instance, the Department of Justice (DOJ) recently convicted Bernie Madoff for running an illegal financial scheme. However, the U.S. government runs many social programs such as social security and Medicare using similar Ponzi Scheme principles. The federal government also violates the Sherman Antitrust Act on so many levels. In fact, it is somewhat comical and ironic that the United States government, the ultimate monopoly, is enforcing antitrust violations. The DOJ, the Department of Education, the Federal Reserve, NASA, the Post Office, the military, and the Department of Energy are just a few examples of government run monopolies. Social programs such as Medicare, social security, and the government’s recent take over of the student loan business are all monopolies that private sector businesses cannot challenge. Ironically, the DOJ monopoly decides which private sector companies are monopolies and violate antitrust statutes.
The Sherman Antitrust Act also “outlaws contracts, combinations, and conspiracies that restrain interstate and foreign trade”. It certainly can be argued that the federal government restrains both interstate and foreign trade by enforcing tariffs, standards, regulations, mandates, restrictions, licensing, labeling, and free trade agreements. For instance, carbon emission standards are restrictions and mandates placed on the automotive industry by both federal and state governments. This is one example of the government “restraining” both interstate and foreign trade.
Currently, Congress is writing legislation to enforce more oversight, regulations, and restrictions on the financial industry. However, government run financial entities such as the Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac are exempt from these laws. Antitrust laws are supposed to protect business entities from predatory acts that may yield a competitive advantage for certain groups and companies. Instead, the government is creating policies and laws that seem to give federally run programs a competitive edge.
Does ObamaCare legislation violate antitrust statutes? Yes, it does! First, ObamaCare fails to lift federal restrictions to make it impossible for people to buy insurance across state lines. After all, the main initiative of antitrust laws is to increase competition and prevent state “protectionism”. Secondly, a mandate to force people to buy insurance favors large established insurance corporations and therefore, gives them a competitive advantage. Third, any attempt to add a public option, via a trigger, could be seen as implementing unfair predatory pricing to force private sector insurance companies out of business.
The bottom line is that the federal government feels it is exempt from the laws it enacts. Time and time again the federal government uses a power grab to break its own laws to force their political ideology and agenda on the people. Face it; each federal politician has ties to lobbyists and special interests leading to favorable legislation for certain unions and corporations giving them an unfair advantage over their competition.
No comments:
Post a Comment