Anti-Trust Enforcement: Can it prevent the growth of monopoly?

 

Two Big Pharma giants are trying to merge. The $28 billion deal between Amgen and Horizon Therapeutics¹ would mark one of the biggest pharma mergers in recent history. Both companies have also been accused of price gouging — together, they’d have even more power to manipulate the market.^2,3

It’s critical that Congress and federal regulators investigate giant corporate mergers and enforce federal antitrust laws. If not, consumers will suffer price hikes — in this case, even higher costs for prescription drugs and health care.

It’s not just Amgen and Horizon — America’s biggest corporations are trying to get even bigger. That’s bad for consumers, public health, and innovation.

Amazon is attempting to acquire One Medical for $3.9 billion,⁴ a move that would help Amazon on its path towards becoming a health care monopoly. Facebook’s parent, Meta, is trying to acquire a prominent VR company.⁵ Two major railroad companies are trying to merge for $27 billion, continuing consolidation in the railroad industry that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has called seriously concerning.⁶

This is not an extensive list, just some examples of the attempts by corporate giants to consolidate their power. But we have federal antitrust laws to protect competition and to protect consumers from worse products for higher prices. Our elected leaders and regulatory agencies must do everything in their power to more frequently and forcefully scrutinize and, when necessary, block these mergers.

- From Demand Progress

 

 Lots of luck with this one. The Sherman Antitrust Act was passed in 1890; did it result in the breakup of the Gilded Age monopolies? No! Clayton Antitrust Act was passed in 1914; did it result in the breakup of monopolies in the Roaring Twenties? No! The Federal Trade Commission was also established in1914; results, the same.

Big business (and I mean really big business) has found work arounds in every case, in particular something called regulatory capture. Business leaders make sure that the members of the regulatory agencies are taken from their ranks and serve, not to break up monopolies, but to protect them. The ultimate in regulatory capture was the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. From the get, the bank regulators were the bankers themselves. The fox is watching the chicken coop.

The problem with relying on faux regulatory agencies, is that it fails to understand how capitalism functions. It is the goal of every company to expand by driving other companies out of business or gobbling them up. Whenever a business fails to follow this “iron law of capitalism”, it is doomed, period. Yes, capitalism is based on competition, but that competition ultimately leads to monopoly. (Note: the advent of massive financialization, private equity, etc. has just accelerated this phenomenon).

One insidious consequence of accepting the myth of capitalist competition leading the innovation and the best possible outcomes for society, is that it promotes the privatization of the public sphere. So, I would argue that the fight against monopoly begins with the defense of the public sphere and the struggle to expand it. Expanded Medicare for All and Community Owned Hospitals; Public Transportation; Public Housing (not the kind we currently have, which I would describe as the warehousing of the poor); Free Public Colleges and Universities; Community Owned Utilities (electric, water, sewer, broad band, etc.); Publics Banks; Public Media. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

Yes, demand regulation and the breakup of monopolies to educate about the nature of the beast, but understand that this is not the solution to the immediate crisis we face. Fighting for the public sphere is critical to defend the interests of the working class.