No images? Click here Welcome to The Corner. In this issue, we introduce Open Markets’ new webpage about our body of work on supply chain monopoly and systems fragility, we discuss Sally Hubbard’s recent testimony to the U.S. Senate about tech platforms, and we explain our comment to the USDA regarding proposed rule changes to the Packers and Stockyards Act. To read previous editions of The Corner, click here. Coronavirus and the Fragility of Industrial and Financial Systems - An Open Markets Primer
In recent weeks, people around the world have watched in horror as key supply systems have failed or come close to failing, in ways that have greatly exacerbated both the health and economic threats posed by the coronavirus pandemic. Problems include a severe shortage of masks and respirators to protect front-line medical workers and the public at large, and a likely shortage of ventilators for people suffering from the disease. Problems also include the cascading shutdown of many large-scale production systems, such as automobile manufacturing, because of the shutdown of highly concentrated parts production systems, with tens of thousands of manufacturing workers joining the ranks of the unemployed. These are issues that the Open Markets team knows a lot about. Indeed, our work grew out of a book that Barry Lynn published in 2005, called End of the Line: The Rise and Coming Fall of the Global Corporation (Doubleday), which in turn was based on a 2002 article in Harper’s Magazine, “Unmade in America.” In those works, Lynn provided pioneering research and reporting on how how concentration of capacity made vital production systems subject to cascading and potentially catastrophic collapse because of any of a variety of shocks, including pandemics. In the years since, the Open Markets team has covered this topic in greater depth than any other group of researchers and thinkers, whether in academia, government, or the private sector, with the partial exception of Yossi Sheffi at MIT and the University of Minnesota epidemiologist Michael Osterholm. This includes pioneering analyses of the effects on international supply systems of the 2008 Lehman Brothers crash, of the 2011 Tohoku disaster in Japan, and of Superstorm Sandy in 2012. It also includes extensive discussions of the complicated and highly dangerous political dimensions of such extreme industrial interdependence. At Open Markets, we understand that Americans are still in the very early stages of making sense of the threats posed by the coronavirus pandemic and the resulting crash of stock markets around the world. But for those who seek to understand why these events have proven to be so disruptive, and what we can do to prevent a repetition in the future, we have created a new primer on our website, here, which includes links to a number of pioneering articles and papers on these issues. And read a recent interview of Lynn by David Dayen of The American Prospect here. In Senate Testimony, Sally Hubbard Condemns Self-Dealing by Platform Monopolies Open Markets Institute’s Director of Enforcement Strategy Sally Hubbard testified on March 10 before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights about self-preferencing by dominant digital technology platforms. The dominant technology platforms Google, Facebook, and Amazon have the power to pick winners and losers in the economy, in ways that pose huge threats to American democracy and the American dream, Hubbard said. Hubbard’s testimony detailed how systemic weaknesses in antitrust policy have helped technology giants attain their market power. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-MN, led the hearing, which took place on the same day that she introduced new antitrust legislation. Klobuchar said, “We have a major monopoly problem in this country, which harms consumers and threatens free and fair competition across our economy. Companies need to be put on notice that exclusionary behavior that threatens competition cannot continue.” In her testimony, Hubbard cited many instances in which these platform monopolists exploited their power to engage in various forms of self-dealing, by placing their own products ahead of those of companies that depend on their services to get to market. Hubbard cited multiple instances in which Amazon had manipulated search results in order to placeAmazon’s branded products in front of the eyes of potential buyers. Hubbard also detailed similar behavior by Google and Apple, and she made clear that this behavior harms citizens both as sellers and buyers within the market. Hubbard presented many solutions to this problem. Hubbard emphasized the historical importance of structural separation, which would prohibit technology platforms from providing multiple competing services that dominant platforms can manipulate in their favor. Hubbard provided context by explaining how structural separation prohibitionshave routinely been used in the banking, television, and telephone industries. Hubbard’s full testimony can be viewed here. The entire Judiciary Committee hearing can be watched here. USDA Rule Change Frees Meatpackers to Abuse Farmers and Ranchers, Open Markets Says in Official Comment The Open Markets Institute argued strongly against proposed changes to the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA), in a comment filed with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on March 13. In our comment, we urged the agency to revive its existing authority under the PSA to curtail meatpackers’ abusive tactics against farmers and to stand up to judicial overreach that has weakened the department’s enforcement authorities. Open Markets argues that the PSA is an essential statute that protects farmers and ranchers from abuse by monopolistic processors while establishing fair terms of trade in livestock and poultry markets. Unfortunately, during the past several decades, federal courts have corrupted the text of the statute and undermined farmers’ ability to challenge mistreatment by meatpackers. Interim, Obama-era rules would have lessened the burden for farmers to seek justice under the PSA, but the current USDA management reversed these rules on the specious grounds that they conflicted with court precedent. The agency’s proposed replacement would leave farmers exposed and would make matters worse by introducing vague and corporate-friendly criteria that could codify abusive industry practices. In response to these proposed rules, Open Markets argues that the USDA has clear authority to issue rules that contradict decades of poor court precedents. Specifically, Open Markets urges the USDA to uphold its long-standing position that harm to industry-wide competition is not necessary to violate the PSA. Open Markets asks the agency to issue new rules that reaffirm this stance and that clearly lay out examples of unfair, abusive, and discriminatory conduct by meatpackers. These changes would reaffirm Congress’ intent in enacting the PSA to broadly protect farmers and ranchers fromconcentrated corporate power. Open Markets’ comment is available here. Read related work by Open Markets here:
🔊 ANTI-MONOPOLY RISING:
📝 WHAT WE'VE BEEN UP TO:
We appreciate your readership. Please consider making a contribution to support the continued publication of this newsletter. 📈 VITAL STAT:$63 billionThe value of the proposed merger between pharmaceutical giants AbbVie and Allergan. The potential deal, which was announced in June 2019, would create the world’s fourth largest pharmaceutical company. The two pharma behemoths signed a consent decree with the FTC on March 17 to sell off three drugs, in order to win FTC approval of the deal. Abbvie says it expects to close the deal in May. 📚 WHAT WE'RE READING:
Open Markets Employment Opportunities You can find the full job listings here. 🔎 TIPS? COMMENTS? SUGGESTIONS? We would love to hear from you—just reply to this e-mail and drop us a line. Give us your feedback, alert us to competition policy news, or let us know your favorite story from this issue. |