125
"Never Seen Anything Like It:" The Biggest Month in Antitrust in 50 Years
(www.thebignewsletter.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
125 points (97.0% liked)
politics
19080 readers
3623 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is the best summary I could come up with:
There is also smaller stuff, the behind-the-scenes institutional changes, like funding levels for antitrust enforcers and newly populist conservative nominees for regulatory agencies that could make a more assertive competition agenda part of a new bipartisan consensus.
The trial has generally gone well for the government, with good evidence that Google thwarted competition from small firms (Branch Technologies) and big ones (Microsoft and Apple), using payoffs.
September 14: The Federal Trade Commission pledged criminal referrals and civil litigation for pharmaceutical executives that use a certain technique - known as ‘Orange Book fraud’ to lie about their patents and in turn block lower priced drugs.
September 21: The Federal Trade Commission, with votes from Commissioners Alvaro Bedoya, Becca Kelly Slaughter, and Lina Khan, sued a New York private equity firm and its subsidiary, U.S. Anesthesia Partners, for rolling up and monopolizing the anesthesiology market in Texas.
September 28: The Antitrust Division sues over meat price-fixing in the chicken, turkey, and poultry industry, alleging that 90% of the market is unlawfully inflated through a conspiracy run by a company called Agri Stats.
This one didn’t get a lot of notice, but it’s about a way that CVS Caremark, one of the largest pharmaceutical middlemen, ends up harming independent pharmacies by charging them excess and unpredictable fees involving Medicare prescription dispensing.
The original article contains 2,322 words, the summary contains 218 words. Saved 91%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!