Politics The Dangers of Conservative ‘Antitrust Revival’

16:25  11 june  2021
16:25  11 june  2021 Source:   nationalreview.com

Watch Carly restart her web show in trailer for iCarly revival

  Watch Carly restart her web show in trailer for iCarly revival The preview, debuted exclusively by EW, introduces Freddie's stepdaughter Millicent and Carly's roommate Harper. Plus, we see the return of eccentric guest stars Nevel Papperman and Nora Dershlit. The series also promises to explore how Freddie and Carly navigate dating in their twenties. And well... it doesn't look like it's going smoothly for either character. Now that Freddie has moved back in with his mother (Mary Scheer) following a divorce, it's cramping his style a bit.

Rachel Bovard has a well-written piece in The American Conservative that argues for those of us on the right to rediscover our true tradition of using antitrust law to stand up to powerful concentrations of market power. By the time you finish reading her piece, it will seem as if aggressive antitrust action is as Republican as splitting rails and running an underground railroad.

Josh Hawley wearing a suit and tie: Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) speaks during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law in Washington, D.C., April 27, 2021. © Al Drago/Pool via Reuters Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) speaks during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law in Washington, D.C., April 27, 2021.

But conservatives should reject her approach. Throughout her piece, Bovard focuses solely on a handful of Big Tech companies for their content decisions that anger conservatives. On this narrow concern, she endorses a purported return to a conservative stand against bigness that would, if enacted, mean the end of capitalism as we know it in America.

New York Democrats move to make it easier for competitors to sue Big Tech companies

  New York Democrats move to make it easier for competitors to sue Big Tech companies An antitrust bill introduced by Democrats in New York's state Senate would make it easier to sue Big Tech companies that are abusing their superior position in the industry, even if they don't technically qualify as a monopoly. © Provided by Washington Examiner The Twenty-First Century Anti-Trust Act, which was first introduced two years ago, has attracted attention for the sweeping changes it would bring to the state's laws by allowing "dominant" companies, particularly tech companies, to be sued for abusing their position in the market and for granting the state attorney general a powerful role in enforcing and

If that sounds a bit hyperbolic, consider the two leading antitrust bills in the Senate today.

One of them, authored by Senator Josh Hawley, would outlaw all mergers and acquisitions for every company with a market cap over $100 billion. That’s roughly a Who’s Who of American capitalism, almost 80 companies in all. So conservatives should go along with ossifying Procter & Gamble, Exxon-Mobil, Boeing, CISCO, AT&T, Eli Lilly, and Texas Instruments because we’re upset that Facebook and Twitter no longer let Donald Trump post?

Senator Hawley would also lower the threshold for prosecution under existing federal antitrust laws, replacing the prevalent “consumer harm” standard with one that “protects competition.” This would turn antitrust law into a blunderbuss aimed by failing competitors against companies that do a better job of serving consumers.

WATCH: Miranda Cosgrove Returns to iCarly in Revival's New Opening Credits

  WATCH: Miranda Cosgrove Returns to iCarly in Revival's New Opening Credits Leave it all to iCarly, which will hit Paramount+ on June 17Paramount+ released the opening credits for the revival of the beloved Nickelodeon series on Wednesday. While the theme song - Cosgrove's "Leave It All To Me" - remains the same, the opening sequence features an updated look to more closely match what technology looks like in 2021.

Worse, by jettisoning the consumer-welfare standard that has anchored antitrust law for almost a half century, American businesses of all sorts would find themselves in a perpetual government choke hold. Any strong company could be accused at any moment of being anticompetitive.

Hawley would also require companies that lose federal antitrust lawsuits to “forfeit all their profits resulting from monopolistic conduct.” This would be a corporate death penalty. With punishment that draconian, expect corporate executives every morning to politely ask regulators and the politicians who control them how high they should jump. If Hawley’s bill is to strike back at “woke” corporations, then his bill is an own-goal because wokeness would virtually become legally mandated.

And finally, Hawley would give the Federal Trade Commission new power to designate and regulate “dominant digital firms” in different online markets. In the name of opening up more space for conservative voices, Hawley would subject social-media companies to regulation by Biden-appointed Democrats. If you dislike the restrictive view some social-media companies take toward conservatives, wait until you put them in a state of perpetual investigation and potential prosecution by woke politicians and regulators in Washington, D.C.

Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google targeted with 5 antitrust bills

  Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google targeted with 5 antitrust bills The proposals, from a bipartisan group in the US House, target Big Tech's might with a wide-ranging antitrust agenda.The bills are aimed at the four tech giants, which collectively influence almost every aspect of online life, as well as the broader industry. If eventually passed into law, the bills would make it easier for the government to break up dominant companies and prevent them from snuffing out competition through preemptive acquisitions.

And this radical proposal is the Republican bill. While not likely to pass, it does a good job of putting a frame of reasonableness around the even more radical Democratic antitrust bill. Senator Amy Klobuchar’s antitrust bill would enact so many potential ways to prosecute, abuse, and torment companies that government would, in essence, become the real board of directors of every major company in America. If your quest, as a conservative, is to rediscover the ethos of the Republican past, embracing the socialization of virtually every business decision is a strange way to do it.

Again, if this sounds hyperbolic, consider the friendly overtures conservatives such as Senator Ted Cruz make toward antitrust actions and neo-Brandeisians such as Lina Khan, soon to be on the Federal Trade Commission. It will only take a few Republicans to enact these radical revisions of American capitalism into law.

Bovard’s piece also seems to ignore that the new reality, that the bigness of Google, Facebook, et al., is the result of network effects, in which the more people who use a service, the more valuable it is. Consumers can destroy these companies any time they want with a mere click. Bovard asks: “Will 10 Googles be any better than one? The answers is yes.” Actually, for the American consumer, the answer would be no. No one wants ten Googles. That is why consumers prefer a service that network effects have given unparalleled reach. Now, perhaps there is a problem here. Perhaps network effects present a serious issue that deserves a new line of thinking. But treating a free service that anyone can leave with a click as if it were the Standard Oil Company is not a thoughtful response. She might argue that consumer choice is an imaginary one regarding Google or Facebook, but it is the consumers themselves who made it so.

What proposed antitrust legislation could mean for Big Tech... and you

  What proposed antitrust legislation could mean for Big Tech... and you Here's what you need to know about the latest attempt to rein in the power of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google.The proposed legislation would mark the most meaningful change to antitrust laws in decades. The bills follow a nearly year-and-a-half-long investigation by the House of Representatives' antitrust subcommittee, which focused on competition in the digital marketplace.

To be fair, there is a lot to appreciate about Rachel Bovard’s piece. I especially appreciate the thoughtful and accurate way she described the antitrust scholarship of my father, Judge Robert Bork. She accurately describes his concern with a panoply of consumer benefits, not just price, in antitrust. She notes his caution about an “economic extravaganza” in which competing economists spin out fantasy projections in court. And she is correct when she notes that Judge Bork modified antitrust doctrine in a way that narrowed its uses, but strongly believed there was a place for it.

All true. But momentum is gaining in the conservative movement to pass one of the most radical revisions of the American economy ever attempted. And if this radical altering of the relationship between public and private sectors succeeds, it will be because of a knee-jerk reaction by conservatives over social-media posts.

More on National Review

  • The Internet Doesn’t Need Heavy-Handed Regulation
  • The House Must Be True to the Credit Needs of American Families and Entrepreneurs
  • Biden Electric-Vehicle Subsidies: A ‘Green’ Giveaway to the Rich

How new antitrust bills could hit Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google .
The legislation targets Silicon Valley's business practices.Though the legislation would affect all companies, lawmakers clearly had four in mind. Rep. Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican who is the ranking member on the House antitrust subcommittee, wasn't shy about naming names.

usr: 0
This is interesting!