SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
lina khan
Kamala Harris Should Embrace—and Build Upon—Biden’s Antitrust Legacy
Harris should reject the smear campaign against Khan’s FTC and commit to reappointing her as chair of the commission, signalling that under her administration, corporate lawbreakers would face the full force of the law.
Sep 06, 2024
U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris’ ascension to the top of the Democratic ticket hasn’t just shifted the 2024 electoral calculus—it’s also reignited the battle for the party’s ideological soul. Just as progressives have outlined their hopes for a Harris administration, so too have bad faith actors looking to turn back the clock on the most significant progressive achievement of the Biden era: the reinvigoration of antitrust enforcement.
The revival of anti-monopoly politics has been met with predictable ire from corporate interests that have got off scot-free for decades. This has been largely directed at Lina Khan, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) chair who has taken on some of America’s most entrenched monopolies. Rather than accede to the demands of Silicon Valley and Wall Street billionaires, Harris should embrace—and entrench—the Biden administration’s antitrust efforts.
It goes without saying that progressives have the right to be disappointed with the legacy of the Biden administration in many respects. Whether one lays the blame on the White House or congressional math, many of the most promising initiatives pushed in 2021 never made it to law. However, the early Biden administration’s focus on reinvigorating antitrust enforcement is one that has paid dividends in the years that followed. The Reagan-era defanging of antitrust helped pave the way for the present-day monopoly crisis, which has left its mark on everything from the tech sector to the rental market to grocery shopping.
The FTC under Khan has taken aim at price gouging in, among others, the energy industry and grocery sector, which compliments Harris’ stated plan to crack down on price gouging if elected.
The Biden administration deserves credit for breaking with his predecessors’ hands-off approach to taking on corporate monopolies. Both Khan at the FTC and Jonathan Kanter, the assistant attorney general for the Antitrust Division at the Department of Justice (DOJ), have taken a tough line against anti-competitive behavior. Khan and Kanter’s efforts to block illegal mergers have been met with rage from corporate America’s worst offenders. This has resulted in frivolous demands for their recusals from key antitrust cases, as well as broader efforts to kneecap antitrust regulation itself. With a “changing of the guard” on the Democratic ticket, these same actors have taken to demanding Harris abandon Biden-era antitrust efforts, complete with a change in personnel.
Harris should reject these demands, and instead look to Khan and Kanter’s successes as a road map for enacting change in Washington. Time and time again, Khan and Kanter have delivered victories for consumers in the face of a hostile press and a right-wing judicial landscape. In August, the DOJ emerged victorious in its historic U.S. v. Google antitrust lawsuit, one that Kanter fittingly says belongs on the “Mount Rushmore of antitrust cases.” In the years following House Democrats’ 2020 report on monopoly power in the tech sector, Biden administration enforcers have filed antitrust suits against Amazon and Apple, along with a separate Google suit set to go to trial this month.
If successful, these lawsuits stand to rein in some of the tech sector’s worst abuses. But make no mistake: The FTC and DOJ’s antitrust efforts target far more than just the abuses of the “Big Tech” giants. This year, the DOJ launched a blockbuster antitrust suit against Ticketmaster, which was largely given a pass for its abuses in previous administrations. The DOJ Antitrust Division has stood with tenants by filing an antitrust lawsuit against RealPage over the company’s role in enabling rental price gouging. The FTC under Khan has taken aim at price gouging in, among others, the energy industry and grocery sector, which compliments Harris’ stated plan to crack down on price gouging if elected.
Antitrust enforcement is both crucial to building a fairer economy and broadly popular with the general public. For this reason, Harris should firmly reject the smear campaign against Khan’s FTC and commit to reappointing her as chair of the commission. Doing so would send a strong signal that under a Harris administration, corporate lawbreakers would face the full force of the law.
Instead of turning back the clock on antitrust, a Harris administration should build upon the progress of the last three years by launching other needed antitrust initiatives. This could include, among others, taking on YouTube-related competition issues, which advocates have sounded the alarm on. More broadly, the DOJ and FTC under a Harris administration should continue to probe would-be monopolists in the artificial intelligence (AI) sector. Given the scope of monopolistic behavior in today’s economy, regulators under a Harris Administration must take a vigilant approach to anti-competitive practices across sectors.Keep ReadingShow Less
'Corporate Greed at Its Absolute Worst': FTC Challenges Kroger Merger
"As grocery store 'price gouging' reaches the top of the political ticket, the FTC is intervening to protect consumers and workers from further harm."
Aug 26, 2024
As grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons faced the U.S. Federal Trade Commission in a federal court Monday, economic justice advocates said Americans should be wary of the corporate media's reporting on the FTC's lawsuit, which aims to block the companies' proposed $24.6 billion merger.
"Get ready for more takes like these from corporate media," said the American Economic Liberties Project (AELP), posting on social media a clip from CNBC in which anchor Joe Kernen echoed Kroger and Albertsons' claims that the merger would help them compete with big box stores like Walmart, lower prices for consumers, and benefit workers.
"With a merger this blatantly harmful to consumers, workers, and countless local communities, Wall Street cheerleaders can't help but rely on misleading arguments," said AELP.
The trial, kicking off in a U.S. District Court in Portland, Oregon, centers on a claim by the FTC along with eight states and the District of Colombia that the merger would reduce industry competition—creating "a straight-up monopoly" in small communities like Gunnison, Colorado where 6,000 residents "would have to drive 65 miles to reach a non-Kroger supermarket," according to AELP.
FTC Chair Lina Khan is also opposing the merger because it would weaken unionized workers' bargaining power, particularly in parts of the country where dozens of Kroger and Albertsons stores are located near each other.
With 115 of 159 Albertsons stores located within two miles of a Kroger in Los Angeles County and Orange County, California, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) has warned that hundreds of unionized workers could see their stores close if the merger is finalized.
As the trial began Monday, The New York Times published an interview with an employee of an Albertsons subsidiary in Woodland Hills, California. Leonard De Monte was represented by the UFCW in 2015 when the grocery store he was working at was sold as part of Albertsons' merger with the store's parent company—a deal that was called "an unmitigated disaster" for workers by AELP senior legal counsel Lee Hepner.
De Monte found another job at the Albertsons subsidiary, but was demoted to minimum wage. Now nine years later, after working his way up to a $27-per-hour union wage, the store De Monte works at is once again at risk of being sold if the merger goes through, and he fears being demoted to minimum wage again and losing his benefits.
"I have great health benefits because I've been with the company so long," he told the Times. "If I lose my health benefits, I would have to pay out of pocket."
Despite the stores' claim that they need to compete with Walmart and Amazon, AELP pointed out in March that Kroger and Albertsons acknowledge one another as their top competition. Without the two stores competing, said the group, "grocery workers will lose bargaining power, both because individually they won't have a competing employer to go work for, and because unions will lose leverage during contract negotiations. As a result, workers will potentially face lower wages, worse working conditions, and layoffs."
According to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute, the merger would reduce the total annual earnings of grocery store workers in affected metropolitan areas by $334 million.
In court on Monday, the FTC displayed text messages showing that Kroger executives have complained that Albertsons has forced it "to accept more worker compensation."
The progressive think tank Roosevelt Institute said the trial, which is expected to go on for three weeks, shows that Khan and the FTC are "taking the harms of corporate consolidation on workers seriously."
Kroger's arguments and business practices—including using "dynamic pricing" to price gouge and its exorbitant CEO pay—represent "corporate greed at its absolute worst," said former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich.
"The Kroger-Albertsons merger would eliminate head-to-head competition between grocery stores across the country," said Hepner. "As grocery store 'price gouging' reaches the top of the political ticket, the FTC is intervening to protect consumers and workers from further harm."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump-Appointed Judge Strikes Down FTC Ban on Noncompete Agreements
"Thirty million workers who were trapped by these agreements will now stay trapped thanks to this ruling," an expert said.
Aug 21, 2024
A U.S. District Court judge in Texas on Tuesday struck down a Federal Trade Commission ban on noncompete agreements that was set to go into effect nationwide in September, drawing condemnation from workers' rights advocates who supported the ban.
Judge Ada Brown, who was appointed to the federal bench by then-President Donald Trump in 2019, ruled that the FTC didn't have the authority to issue substantive rules such as the noncompete ban, which was issued following a 3-2 vote of the agency's commissioners in April.
Noncompetes bar workers from getting jobs with competitors or leaving to start their own company. Commissioners in the majority, including FTC Chair Lina Khan, said the agreements suppress wages, stifle entrepreneurship, and distort labor markets. Advocates have long argued that the agreements are anti-worker.
The FTC has estimated that 30 million U.S. workers are subject to noncompete agreements. Had the rule gone into effect—voiding most existing agreements and prohibiting new ones—workers would have collectively increased their earnings by hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, the agency said.
"We are disappointed by Judge Brown's decision and will keep fighting to stop noncompetes that restrict the economic liberty of hardworking Americans, hamper economic growth, limit innovation, and depress wages," Victoria Graham, an FTC spokesperson, toldThe Washington Post.
Bharat Ramamurti, a former deputy director of the National Economic Council who's now a senior adviser at the American Economic Liberties Project (AELP), an anti-monopoly advocacy group, said on social media that "30 million workers who were trapped by these agreements will now stay trapped thanks to this ruling."
30 million workers who were trapped by these agreements will now stay trapped thanks to this ruling. The FTC estimated that banning noncompetes would empower workers and raise wages by nearly $200 billion over the next decade, which is why big business lobbyists fought it. https://t.co/G79l9l5UWs
— Bharat Ramamurti (@BharatRamamurti) August 20, 2024
Ryan LLC, a tax services firm based in Dallas, sued to block the FTC regulation as soon as it was issued in April. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable later joined the case, which is in a jurisdiction friendly to their interests. If the case is appealed, which Graham said the FTC is "seriously considering," it would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit—the most right-wing, pro-business appeals court in the country.
Tuesday's ruling, though momentous, didn't come as a surprise. Judge Brown signaled her intent to side with the plaintiffs last month when she partially blocked the FTC rule and placed a temporary injunction on it.
Similar cases involving the FTC noncompete ban have recently appeared in federal courts in Florida and Pennsylvania, with different and less consequential outcomes, raising the possibility that the matter will be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court's right-wing majority would make a ruling favorable to the FTC unlikely, so congressional action could be necessary to institute a ban on noncompete clauses, experts say.
Banning noncompetes is popular among the general public and has some bipartisan support, with a number of prominent Republicans having come out in favor of a ban or narrower reforms, such as prohibiting such agreements for low-wage workers.
Khan, an antitrust leader beloved of progressives, received 21 confirmation votes from Republicans in 2021, and parts of her agenda are supported by the GOP.
Khan is far from universally loved among Democrats. She's recently been the target of Democratic megadonors such as LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, who's pushed Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, to sack Khan if elected. However, even Hoffman has indicated support for the noncompete ban.
HuffPost reporter Daniel Marans on Saturday wrote that the noncompete ban was "Khan's most ambitious initiative" and cited expert opinion that even if the rule didn't hold up, it was part of a broader push that could ultimately lead to reform.
"Even if the FTC rule is overturned, there are still many other efforts afoot to undermine the use of these agreements," Lee Hepner, senior legal counsel at AELP, told Marans. "It's a multi-pronged strategy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular