March, 16 2022, 01:29pm EDT
Warren, Jones Introduce Bicameral Legislation to Ban Anticompetitive Mergers, Restore Competition, and Bring Down Prices for Consumers
New Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act Would Ban the Biggest, Most Anticompetitive Mergers; Give the DOJ and FTC Tools to Reject Deals and Break Up Monopolies
WASHINGTON
United States Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and United States Representative Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.) introduced bicameral legislation to help stomp out rampant industry consolidation that allows companies to raise consumer prices and mistreat workers. The Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act would ban the biggest, most anticompetitive mergers and give the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the teeth to reject deals in the first instance without court orders and to break up harmful mergers.
For capitalism to work for all Americans, our markets must have meaningful, robust competition. Since the 1970s, weak antitrust enforcement has led to increased industry consolidation across the American economy. Today, a handful of giant corporations are dominating countless industries to the detriment of consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs of all backgrounds. This worsening economic concentration also distorts our political processes, allowing the biggest and wealthiest firms to rig the rules in their favor.
Without robust competition, large opportunistic corporations are able to use inflation as a pretext to abuse their pricing power and jack up prices for American consumers at the grocery store, at the gas pump, and at the pharmacy. This excessive market power costs American families $5,000 per year on average and has depressed median household wages by $10,000.
Moreover, for the first time, the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act would require the FTC and the DOJ to consider how a merger would impact workers -- and to reject mergers that would harm them. The bill would empower the FTC and the DOJ Antitrust Division to reject transactions that would exacerbate corporate domination of labor markets and block transactions that would weaken collective bargaining agreements, reduce employee benefits and compensation, or cause layoffs.
"For the last five decades, big companies have had almost free reign over our economy, squashing competitors, growing bigger and bigger, and abusing their market power to price gouge consumers and crush workers and small businesses. This unconstitutional behavior has to stop. My new bill with Rep. Jones would restore our country's anti-monopoly tradition by banning the biggest, most anticompetitive mergers and giving the DOJ and the FTC stronger tools to enforce our antitrust laws and restore real competition in our markets. Congress needs to take bold action to bring down prices for families and promote a fairer economy for all Americans, and our bill would do just that," said Senator Warren.
"In 2021, our antitrust agencies received more merger filings than in any other year during the last decade," said Congressman Mondaire Jones. "From major tech mergers between companies like Facebook and Instagram to agriculture mergers between companies like Wayne and Sanderson Farms, the recent rise in corporate consolidation has increased unemployment, suppressed wages, and allowed companies to hike up prices even further during this period of inflation. It's why we need the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act, which I'm proud to introduce with Senator Elizabeth Warren. Our bill would empower workers, raise wages, reduce prices, combat inequality, and enable small businesses to thrive. By banning the biggest, most anticompetitive mergers, overhauling the merger-review process to include consideration of labor-market consequences, and strengthening agencies' tools to break up harmful mergers, our bill will tackle corporate consolidation head on and help build a fairer, more vibrant economy that works for everyone."
Specifically, the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act would:
- Make "prohibited mergers" illegal, including:
- Deals valued over $5 billion
- Deals resulting in market shares above 33% for sellers or 25% for employers
- Deals resulting in highly concentrated markets under the 1992 agency guidelines
- Overhaul the merger-review process by giving antitrust agencies stronger tools to stop the most harmful mergers, such as:
- Allowing the agencies to reject mergers in the first instance without court orders
- Requiring the agencies to reject certain mergers, including prohibited mergers
- Prohibiting firms with a history of corporate crime or antitrust violations in the last ten years from acquiring other companies
- Prohibiting the agencies from negotiating remedies with the merging parties
- Directing the agencies to scrutinize the labor impacts of each deal and reject mergers harmful to workers
- Prohibiting private-equity "roll up" strategies that quickly consolidate industries
- Giving a greater role to other relevant agencies and state attorneys general
- Requiring courts to defer to certain agency determinations
- Stripping merger litigation from the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
- Establish procedures for the antitrust agencies to conduct retrospective reviews and break up harmful deals that have destroyed competition
Senator Warren and Rep. Jones have previously called on the DOJ to consider opposing large, anticompetitive mergers. Earlier this year, they slammed the proposed merger between Sanderson Farms and Wayne Farms, two of the country's largest poultry processors, and called on the DOJ to thoroughly review the deal and step in to prevent harm to American farmers and consumers as poultry prices soar. Warren and Jones also raised concerns to the DOJ and Department of Transportation that Frontier Airlines' proposed acquisition of Spirit Airlines could further increase airline concentration, which has reduced competition and hurt consumers and workers over the past several decades. Senator Warren has also called on the FTC to consider harms to workers and harms throughout entire business ecosystems in a letter regarding Amazon's proposed acquisition of MGM Studios, and she questioned the effectiveness of behavioral remedies altogether in the defense industry in a letter regarding Lockheed Martin's proposed acquisition of Aerojet Rocketdyne, a vertical deal that the parties recently abandoned. All of these transactions would have been prohibited under this new legislation.
The legislation is cosponsored in the Senate by U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Minn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Edward J Markey (D-Mass.).
The legislation is cosponsored in the House by U.S. Representatives Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Katie Porter (D-Calif.), Jesus "Chuy" Garcia (D-Ill.), Andy Levin (D-Mich.), Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.).
The legislation is endorsed by more than 70 antitrust, labor, agriculture, and advocacy organizations including Public Citizen, Open Markets Institute, Communications Workers of America, Color of Change, American Economic Liberties Project, Food & Water Watch, Farm Action Fund, United for Respect, Strategic Organizing Center, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and Teamsters.
"The Teamsters are proud to stand alongside Senator Warren as she introduces legislation recognizing how workers are at the core of mergers and significant corporate concentration," said International Brotherhood of Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa. "For too long, workers have been left behind in the merger process that invariably impacts their lives and families. On a broader scale, this legislation is a major step in the right direction for greater worker inclusion and representation on antitrust issues that affect workers' wages, job security and overall working conditions. We hope Congress will act swiftly to pass this legislation and give workers the seat at the table they deserve."
"It's high time we revamped America's approach to corporate concentration. Over the past few decades, major companies in air travel, telecommunications, agriculture, and social media have combined or hoovered up competitors to the detriment of the economy and with real impacts for regular Americans. This groundbreaking legislation would put power back in the hands of the public, reduce corporate concentration in the economy, and restore fair competition for the benefit of small businesses, workers, and consumers," said Matthew Kent, Competition Policy Advocate, Public Citizen.
"The Open Markets Institute strongly applauds Senator Elizabeth Warren and Congressman Mondaire Jones for introducing the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act of 2022, a critically important and transformative bill. Monopolists directly threaten freedom of the press and freedom of expression, the stability of our most basic industrial and financial systems, and the liberty to build better communities, better businesses, and better technologies. The American people repeatedly and resoundingly have expressed our fear of private monopoly and our intention to break or neutralize all concentrated private power. We hope today's legislation marks a first step towards the restoration and strengthening of the true will of the American people as expressed through Congress in the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914," said Barry Lynn, Executive Director of the Open Markets Institute.
"The Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act of 2022 takes direct aim at the record-shattering merger frenzy now supercharging the concentration of wealth and power in America," said Sarah Miller, Executive Director of the American Economic Liberties Project. "This legislation prioritizes the needs of working people, honest businesses, and consumers, clearly prohibiting the largest mergers and providing antitrust enforcers with important tools to block and unwind bad deals. It offers critical support to the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice as the agencies work to confront the current merger boom. And it remedies many of the most serious issues with current federal merger policy. Congress should pass it immediately."
"It is critical that we look at mergers through the lens of their impact on minority-owned businesses," said Rashad Robinson, President of Color Of Change. "Approving mergers without doing so has become a key driver of inequality: for decades, corporate monopolies have directly suppressed the growth of Black-owned businesses and the contributions of Black entrepreneurs. Antitrust reform like the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act of 2022 will help ensure the long-overdue investments in Black communities, and Color Of Change applauds Senator Warren and Representative Jones for standing up to the many harmful effects of consolidated corporate power. Stronger antitrust legislation is an essential tool for ensuring racial justice in our economy."
"Concentrated market power is the single biggest threat facing independent businesses in my community," said Theodora Skeadas, Executive Director of Cambridge Local First (CLF). "Cambridge Local First represents nearly 500 unique small businesses in Cambridge, Massachusetts. A key part of our mission is to promote and celebrate a 'local economy community' and support our home town businesses. We need Congress to step in and stand up to giant businesses like Amazon that are undermining our communities. It's a relief to see Sen. Warren and Rep. Jones bringing some basic fairness back to our economy."
"Local independent businesses are the backbone of our communities in New York," said Bob Giordano, President/Founder of the Westchester Independent Business Alliance. "They provide character and individuality while keeping jobs and money in the local community. Our small businesses do so much for our communities, but too often the deck is stacked in favor of dominant companies like Amazon, big box stores and national and regional chains. We need this legislation to break up the power of monopolies and ensure small, independent businesses a fair shot at competing."
"Many of the difficulties facing American families today - from inflated prices for everyday needs to threats to our food safety, health and climate - can be traced back to egregious corporate mega-mergers that were foolishly rubber-stamped in recent years. This critical legislation will put a halt on anti-competitive, anti-consumer mergers, and also put a halt to some of the worst corporate profiteering that is so rampant in our country today," said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch, a national advocacy group. "It's time for Congress to get serious about protecting American families and workers, and make this bill the law."
"Antitrust agencies have had to combat record-breaking levels of consolidation with one hand tied behind their backs," said Sarah Carden, Policy Advocate at Farm Action Fund. "Our small businesses, our farms, our communities -- they need an economy that works for them, not one that just pumps out more corporate profits. This bill can deliver that."
"Organic dairy farm families thrive on competition to set a fair price for their organic milk. With the exit of Danone there is only one buyer of organic milk in New England and Eastern New York. Without competition the price we currently receive is 15% below the cost of production and equal to what we were paid in 2014. The Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance supports the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act to provide a living wage for all farmers," said NODPA Board President Liz Bawden.
"Organic farmers are being harmed by extreme consolidation in the food system. Right now, dozens of organic dairy farmers in New England are facing an economic crisis because one of the very few buyers of organic milk is shifting to large farms in other regions of the country. The Organic Farmers Association supports the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act because farmers and the resilience of our food supply suffer when already dominant companies are allowed to get even bigger. Stopping the growth of mega-mergers is the first step in getting more buyers and a fair price for organic farmers," said Kate Mendenhall, Director of Organic Farmers Association.
A full list of endorsements can be found here.
Letter of support from advocacy organizations can be found here.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat and fearless consumer advocate who has made her life's work the fight for middle class families, was elected to the United States Senate on November 6, 2012, by the people of Massachusetts.
LATEST NEWS
Trump DOJ Sides With Roundup Manufacturer Over Cancer Victims in Supreme Court Case
An attorney at Food & Water Watch said the DOJ sent a "clear message... to sick Americans harmed by toxic pesticides: Trump has Bayer’s back, not theirs."
Dec 02, 2025
The Trump administration is pushing for the US Supreme Court to shield the manufacturer of Roundup from thousands of state lawsuits alleging that its widely used herbicide product causes cancer.
On Monday, US Solicitor General D. John Sauer recommended that the high court agree to hear a challenge to a Missouri jury's verdict in 2023 that awarded $1.25 million to a man named John Durnell, who claimed that the product caused him to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Bayer, the agribusiness giant that purchased the manufacturer of Roundup, the agribusiness giant Monsanto, in 2018, immediately challenged the verdict.
In 2015, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as "probably carcinogenic to humans" based on "limited evidence."
That evidence became less limited in 2019, when a prominent meta-analysis by a team of environmental health researchers found that people exposed to glyphosate at the highest levels had a 41% higher risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma than those who weren't.
There are nearly 4,500 Roundup claims currently pending in federal court, and at least 24 cases have gone to trial since October 2023. They make up just a fraction of the more than 170,000 claims filed.
According to Bloomberg, Bayer has already been forced to pay out more than $10 billion in verdicts and settlements over the product, which has caused a massive drain on the company's stock price.
In what it said was an effort to “manage litigation risk and not because of any safety concerns,” Bayer removed glyphosate-based herbicides from the residential market in 2023, switching to formulas that “rely on alternative active ingredients.”
That didn't stop the lawsuits from coming. Durnell's victory was the first successful case brought against Bayer outside California, the only state that labels the product as carcinogenic. That in Missouri opened the floodgates in other states, and plaintiffs subsequently won sizable payouts in Georgia and Pennsylvania.
But now the Trump administration is trying to help the company skirt further accountability. Sauer, who is tasked with arguing for the government in nearly every Supreme Court case, filed a 24-page brief stating that there is a lack of clarity on whether states have the authority to determine whether Bayer and Monsanto violated the law by failing to warn customers about potential cancer risks from Roundup.
Bayer argues that these cases are preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which forbids states from enacting labeling requirements more stringent than those recommended by the federal government.
Sauer agreed with Bayer, stating in the brief that the US Environmental Protection Agency "has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans, and the agency has repeatedly approved Roundup labels that did not contain cancer warnings."
In 2016 and again in 2020, the EPA indeed classified glyphosate as "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans" following agency assessments. However, in 2022, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals voided this assessment, finding that the agency applied “inconsistent reasoning” in its review of the science.
Among the justifications for the ruling were that the EPA relied heavily on unpublished, non-peer-reviewed studies submitted to regulators by Monsanto and other companies that manufacture glyphosate. The agency also largely disregarded findings from animal studies included by the IARC, which showed a strong link between glyphosate and cancer.
"The World Health Organization has recognized glyphosate as a probable carcinogen while the EPA continues to twist itself into pretzels to come to the opposite conclusion," Lori Ann Burd, a staff attorney and director of the Center for Biological Diversity's environmental health program, told Common Dreams.
Notably, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. built his national profile campaigning against the dangers of pesticides and railing against regulatory capture by big business.
Kennedy served as an attorney for Dewayne Johnson, the first plaintiff to win damages against Monsanto in 2018, where a jury determined that Roundup had contributed to his cancer.
"If my life were a Superman comic, Monsanto would be my Lex Luthor," Kennedy said in a 2020 Facebook post. "I've seen this company as the enemy of every admirable American value."
During Kennedy's 2024 presidential run, he pledged to "ban the worst agricultural chemicals already banned in other countries."
But after he was sworn in as President Donald Trump's HHS Secretary, he began to sing a different tune. As Investigate Midwest noted, his "Make America Healthy Again" commission's introductory report made no mention of glyphosate.
Meanwhile, he reassured the pesticide industry that it had nothing to worry about: "There’s a million farmers who rely on glyphosate. 100% of corn in this country relies on glyphosate. We are not going to do anything to jeopardize that business model," he said during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing.
The Trump EPA has deregulated toxic chemicals across the board over the past year. It rolled back protections against per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as "forever chemicals," in drinking water, which have many documented health risks. It has also declined to ban the widely used insecticide chlorpyrifos, which has been linked to neurodevelopmental disorders in children.
Elizabeth Kucinich, the former director of policy at the Center for Food Safety, described the US Department of Justice's effort to shield Bayer as another "betrayal of MAHA health promises." Her husband, the two-time Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, worked as the campaign manager for RFK Jr.'s 2024 presidential bid.
“This is regulatory capture, not public protection,” she said. “This action shields chemical manufacturers from accountability by elevating a captured federal regulatory process over the lived harm of real people. That is anti-life, and it is exactly what millions of MAHA voters believed they were voting against.”
Food & Water Watch staff attorney Dani Replogle said the DOJ filing "encourages the Supreme Court to slam judiciary doors in the faces of cancer patients across the country."
"No political posturing can undo the clear message this brief sends to sick Americans harmed by toxic pesticides," she continued. "Trump has Bayer’s back, not theirs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Evil and Disgusting': From Sabrina Carpenter to Franklin the Turtle, 'Violent' Memes by Trump Officials Rebuked
"This is a government that is not only full of sadists, but has elevated sadism to a place of honor in politics and policy," said one journalist.
Dec 02, 2025
Pop star Sabrina Carpenter and Kids Can Press, publisher of the popular Franklin the Turtle children's book series, are shaming President Donald Trump's administration for using their work to promote its policies of mass deportation and extrajudicial killing.
On Monday, the official White House X account posted a video showing federal agents chasing, apprehending, and detaining purported undocumented immigrants that featured Carpenter's song "Juno" as its soundtrack.
On Tuesday morning, Carpenter angrily denounced the White House for using her song in a mass deportation video.
"This video is evil and disgusting," she wrote in response. "Do not ever involve me or my music to benefit your inhumane agenda."
An administration spokesperson responded to Carpenter's message by continuing to reference her lyrics, and said that "anyone who would defend these sick monsters" that the administration is deporting "must be stupid, or is it slow," a line lifted from her hit song "Manchild."
As noted by the Guardian, Carpenter is just the latest popular artist to object to the Trump White House using their work in propaganda videos, as Beyoncé, Olivia Rodrigo, Kenny Loggins, and Foo Fighters have also attacked the White House for hijacking their songs.
Kids Can Press, meanwhile, slammed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after he posted a meme depicting Franklin the Turtle launching air-to-surface missiles at the boats of supposed "narco-terrorists" in the Caribbean.
In a statement, the publisher said that it "strongly" condemned "any denigrating, violent, or unauthorized use of Franklin’s name or image," such the one Hegseth posted on social media.
“Franklin the Turtle is a beloved Canadian icon who has inspired generations of children and stands for kindness, empathy, and inclusivity,” the published emphasized.
Hegseth posted the meme shortly after the Washington Post reported last week that US defense forces had conducted a "double-tap" strike against a suspected drug boat in September with the express purpose of killing two men who had survived the initial strike on the vessel.
Many legal scholars consider such an action to be murder or an overt war crime, and Hegseth and the Trump White House in recent days have been trying to shift responsibility for authorizing the second strike to Adm. Frank Bradley.
Writing in his Substack page on Tuesday, journalist Paul Waldman noted that Hegseth's attitude toward extrajudicial killing shouldn't be a surprise since he had previously lobbied Trump during his first term in office to pardon convicted war criminals.
"This is a government that is not only full of sadists, but has elevated sadism to a place of honor in politics and policy," he wrote. "If you’re one of Trump’s underlings and you aren’t publicly expressing glee at the prospect of punishing and abusing those with less power, then you won’t really fit in. That’s the context in which we have to view this event."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Billionaire-Funded ‘Trump Accounts’ for Kids Slammed as 'Another Tax Shelter' for the Rich
"If the White House were serious about supporting families struggling with the costs of living, it would be advocating for investments in childcare," said one children's advocate.
Dec 02, 2025
After Silicon Valley CEO Michael Dell and his wife, philanthropist Susan Dell, announced Tuesday their plan to invest $6.25 billion in seed money in individual investment accounts for 25 million American children, adding to the number of kids who would receive so-called "Trump Accounts" that were included in the Republican spending bill this year, advocates acknowledged that a direct cash investment could feasibly help some families.
But the National Women's Law Center (NWLC) was among those wondering whether the Dells' investment of $6.25 billion—a fraction of their $148 billion fortune—would ultimately benefit wealthy investors far more.
“While we support direct investments in families, the Trump Accounts being hailed by the White House are a policy solution that doesn’t meet most families’ needs,” said Amy Matsui, the vice president of income security and child care at NWLC. “As currently structured, these accounts will just become another tax shelter for the wealthiest, while the overwhelming majority of American families, who are struggling to cover basic costs like food, childcare, and housing, will be hard pressed to find the extra money that could turn the seed money into a meaningful investment."
The Dells, who are behind Dell Technologies, announced the investment plan months after President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill into law. The tax and spending law includes a provision that would start an investment account for every US citizen child born between January 2025-December 2028, with a $1,000 investment from the US government.
As Jezebel reported, the couple's contribution would got to an additional 25 million children, up to age 10, who were born prior to the 2025 cut-off date for the initial Trump Accounts.
"Around 80% of children born between 2016-2024 would theoretically qualify, although there are cutoffs based on household income: Applying families would have to live in ZIP codes where the median household income is less than $150,000 per year," wrote Jim Vorel.
In the corporate press, the Dells were applauded for making what they called the largest single private charitable donation to US children, but Vorel questioned the real-world impact of "a gift of $250, thrown vaguely in the direction of millions of American families by members of our billionaire ruling class."
"What can that money realistically do in terms of providing for a child’s future?" he wrote. "Is it the seed that is going to allow them to go to college, to buy a house some day? Does that really seem likely? Or are we primarily talking about billionaires running PR campaigns for a president who recently hit new second term lows in his overall approval numbers?"
The success of the individual investment accounts hinges on whether Americans and their employers—who can contribute up to $2,500 per year without counting it as taxable income—will be able to consistently and meaningfully invest money in the accounts until their children turn 18, considering that about a quarter of US households are living paycheck to paycheck, according to a recent poll.
"Do you know many families in 2025 that would describe themselves as having a spare $5,000 per year to immediately start investing in a government-backed investment account, even if that might be relatively sound financial strategy? Or are the families in your orbit already scraping to get by, without being able to commit much attention to investing in the future?" asked Vorel, adding that the artificial intelligence "bubble" is widely expected to soon burst and drag the stock market in which Trump is urging families to invest "into a deep pit of despair."
"As is so often the case, the families most benefited by the concept of Trump Accounts will be those ones who are already on the best financial footing, aka the wealthiest Americans," he wrote.
Jonathan Cohn of Progressive Mass was among those who said the Dells' investment only served to demonstrate how "they should pay more in taxes" to ensure all US children can benefit from public, not private, investment in education, healthcare, and other social supports.
"The government should not be funding only what can secure the sympathies of erratic rich people," said Cohn.
The NWLC argued the Trump Accounts are an example of the White House's embrace of "pronatalism"—the belief that the government should incentivize Americans to have more children—but fall short of being a policy that would actually make a measurable positive impact on families.
“In the end, this policy mirrors the rest of the law: another giveaway to the richest Americans that leaves everyone else further behind," said Matsui. "If the White House were serious about supporting families struggling with the costs of living, it would be advocating for investments in childcare, an expanded Child Tax Credit, and undoing the historic cuts to SNAP and Medicaid.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


