At President-elect Trump’s 2024 campaign rallies, attendees held up “Trump will fix this” signs. Let’s hope that the antitrust policy that President Biden has excessively politicized is one of those “his.” Trump’s running mate, Senator Vance, previously said he thought Mr. Biden’s nominee to chair the Federal Trade Commission, Lina Khan, had done a good job on antitrust policy. I don’t agree.

For nearly 40 years, most antitrust scholars have reasonably agreed that government should base its treatment of potential corporate monopolizations, mergers, and related issues on the effect of those actions on “welfare.” consumers”. This standard ensures that antitrust laws are used only to prevent companies from undermining economic competition, thereby preserving a market that lowers prices and improves product quality on behalf of us, consumers. Antitrust laws should not protect businesses Since competition.

In taking control of the FTC, Ms. Khan abandoned that standard and, with it, decades of bipartisan agreement. Mr. Biden’s Justice Department and the FTC have quickly transformed antitrust into a tool to help the White House achieve policy goals that have nothing to do with maintaining competitive markets.

Consider, for example, how the FTC sued Elon Musk. A recently released report by the House Judiciary Committee examined how Ms Khan issued a consent decree against X – then Twitter – for no other reason than that Mr Musk – whose business interests were in other sectors – was the general director of the company. Ms. Khan “called for an immediate vote” just days after reporters reported the sale, which an FTC insider said sparked the attention.

The Biden FTC also had no problem targeting companies that challenged its corporate donor base. For example, Ms. Khan issued an interim report against pharmacy benefit managers, companies that health plans hire to ensure they receive medications at competitive costs. Major drugmakers have spent large sums lobbying the government to challenge PBMs, even though the government’s own research shows that these companies save patients – and taxpayers – significant amounts of money.

With consumer welfare standards falling, facts have not stopped Ms. Khan from shielding pharmaceutical companies, which flooded her boss with campaign contributions, from market discipline.

These shenanigans led a Republican FTC commissioner, Melissa Holyoak, to publicly express her disagreement. She protested that “the report was marred by procedural irregularities and concerns about the content – ​​or lack thereof – of the original order.” So much so that “the politicized nature of the process appears to have led to the departure of at least one senior executive from the Commission.”

If this is a “good job” according to Mr. Vance, we should be alarmed.

Biden’s DOJ no longer acted responsibly. For example, she sued RealPage, an AI-based software company that helps homeowners accept market prices for their homes, for facilitating allegations of price gouging, even though she had no proof. The Wall Street Journal editorial board said, “It does not require a Ph.D. in economics to understand that rising rents are caused by demand exceeding supply” and that “what is really happening (with this lawsuit) is an attempt to distract voters from their frustration with the inflationary policies of the Biden administration.”

More recently, Mr. Biden’s Justice Department has targeted Visa’s debit card business due to market share concerns, despite the clear benefits the company brings to consumers. These include secure, accessible services that millions of Americans rely on. Businesses and consumers have many payment choices, but millions of people choose Visa for this reason. Rather than respecting these choices, Mr. Biden’s DOJ is pursuing its anti-business agenda without regard for the well-being of consumers.

The solution to the DOJ and FTC’s drift into political partisanship is simple: comprehensive reform. Come January, the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Congress must demand a recommitment to consumer welfare standards. They must put in place controls that prevent the DOJ and FTC from waging ideological war. Measures to ensure transparency and collaboration among the commissions, such as requiring the FTC to disclose the reasons and goals of its investigations, could also be helpful.

It’s hard to overstate the importance of appointing a better Attorney General and a better FTC Chairman this time around. Combined with new oversight measures, it could go a long way toward restoring fairness, protecting real competition, and preventing rogue bureaucrats from imposing their will for personal or ideological gain. More importantly, it would help restore the country’s confidence in its government institutions. It remains to be seen whether this will happen.

American businesses and consumers deserve a government that respects the rule of law. By simply refocusing the FTC and the DOJ’s Antitrust Division on their core goals, we can usher in a new era of fair and impartial regulation that serves the public good. This is something we should all be able to get behind.

Creators.com