DOJ decides capitalism works with respect to XM and Sirius merger

WHY DOES THE DOJ HAVE ANY SAY WHATSOEVER?
Even though the Department of Justice should have absolutely ZERO say in whether companies merge, at least they finally made a correct decision for once, albeit about a year late.

SIRIUS + XM FLIES!
The DOJ approved the merger of money-losing Sirius and money-losing XM satellite radio companies. When this merger was first announced over a year ago, it looked like it had a less than 5% chance of success; however, Mel Karmazin worked some kind of magic to get the DOJ to approve this merger.

Approved, but (of course) meddled:
You didn't think capitalism was going to be allowed to work all by itself? The merger was allowed by the DOJ only after Karmazin had to promise a la carte low-tier pricing for the masses, instead of being allowed to run his company as he sees fit. Hats off to Mr. Karmazin, though, this feat is nothing short of herculean given that the satellite TV companies (DirectTV and Echostar/DISH) were NOT allowed to merge.

Not over yet, FCC still to decide:
Now the FCC gets to weigh-in on the deal. If the FCC fails to approve this merger, they should be fired by the Executive Branch of our government. Is it possible the FCC can drag this out for another year? Probably shouldn't bet against it-- hurray for government!

Where can you find the Sherman Act?

The Sherman Act, against "Trusts" or "Monopolies", was incorporated into US law in 1890 (initiated by the Senate, and Senator Sherman), and it's surviving and often-modified remnants can be examined by reading the titles of the latest version of the official law of the United States. The official law of the United States is encoded into volumes called "The United States Code" (or USC). (there are other parts to US law, but the USC contains the code of all laws initiated and modified by Congress) The USC's Title 15, governing Commerce & Trade, contains the codes of law derived from the original Sherman Act. There are 97 chapters of Title 15 in the latest online version of the USC (2000 edition, Gov't Printing Office website), and a quick browse of chapter headings highlights chapters 1 & 2 as primary antitrust areas of the USC. Forget about reading all this lawyeresque CRAP, here's everything you need to know about the actual antitrust law...

Chapter 1,
sections 1 thru 7: (paraphrased)
Every conspiracy in restraint of trade (sec 1) or monopolization (sec 2) of trade, is illegal.
Conspirators are guilty of a felony.
Conspirators can be fined (upto but not to exceed $10 million for corporations and
a max of $350,000 for persons)
or imprisoned (not to exceed 3 years),
or both (court discretion).
Definitions of conspiracy and monopolization, including the word monopoly itself, are entirely broad, largely undefined and ultimately left upto the Attorney General and the moods of the US public at the time of enforcement. Basically, guilty parties are whomever the Attorney General can convince the District Court judges they are. A political crapshoot. Guilty parties should prepare to act humble (as Bill Gates did NOT) and brown-nose as much as possible.

The Attorney General is in charge of enforcing this law (Sec 4) via the jurisdiction of the District Courts, and he has plenty of political leeway to do as he personally likes. He can subpeona (sec 5) anyone, for long undefined periods of time; therefore his investigation is a time-consuming vortex of distraction which CEOs and other employees of companies cannot afford-- if they wish to competitively (fairly) beat their competition. [For instance, Microsoft began settling many court cases because the very-valuable Bill Gates would've spent most of his time in court, instead of figuring out how his company can thrive "at the office". To understand this concept, ask yourself how much work YOU get done while you're on jury duty??]

If guilty, the conspirator-monopolist company/person's assets, which were gained by monopoly, can be siezed (Sec 6) by the US government. Bye bye business.

Sec 13: takes away a company's ability to freely price its product based on competitive pressures alone. There's a clause in this section allowing Federal Trade Commission (FTC) intervention in the company's business.

Sec 14: takes away a company's ability to form partnerships with its customers, if the partnership has clauses which prevent the customer from using a competitor's product. This is like not allowing exclusives, but only for company's deemed to be "monopolistic" (which is a loose term in the first place).

Sec 15: Here's where the real damage sets in. ALL "Injured" competitors may sue the monopolist for damages, which is entirely seperate from the justice determination of the monopolistic company. The District courts get to decide the "damages" which can be based on nearly arbitrary, but certainly estimated, calculation. Thus the monopolistic company can be raided-- not much different from a band of vikings coming into your home and stealing everything you have, simply because you are "too good" at your job.


SECTIONS 16 thru 37a can be paraphrased later.


Thanks to...
the official US Government Printing Office website.
For having Title 15 of the US Code readily available on the web.
Then again, THIS law shouldn't need to be put on the web, nor on the books, since Title 15's elimination would benefit every person in the United States. Nullifying the Sherman Anti-Trust Act would not only improve our country, and the world, but would also make our dusty U.S. lawbook a LOT easier to read. Think about it, we almost put Bill Gates, J.D. Rockefeller, and the successor's of Alexander Graham Bell in JAIL. Tell this to your children: Big bad U.S. politicians with guns in their hands, would have put Alexander Graham Bell into jail if Bell had simply grew his "monopoly" business fast enough to exist in his lifetime. THEN compare this to the U.S. Post Office, which is a monopoly your U.S. politicians OWN, a government monopoly. Or compare it to the George Washington Bridge, Lincoln Tunnel, or Holland Tunnel. Same thing, your federal and local politicians don't mind RUNNING a monopoly, and even using gun-backed laws to protect them, but if a private citizen creates a great product to which customers WILLINGLY flock, those same politicians move quickly to put the CEO into JAIL.

John Sherman vs. Rufus Blodgett

In the mid-to-late 1800s, public demand grew for an anti-trust law. And "public demand" in this case, means a group of Americans with all the rational and disciplined thought of a lynching mob.

The Sherman Act was a bill introduced in the Senate by John Sherman (picture above right), Ohio, chairman of the finance committee and President Hayes' Secretary of the Treasury, and it passed by a vote of 52:1 on April 8, 1890. This blog's hero dissenter was Rufus Blodgett (picture below right), democrat, of Long Branch, New Jersey-- machinist, railroad supplier, banker, born in New Hampshire.

The House of Representitives passed the bill unanimously, 242:0, with one ammendment on May 1, 1890.

The bill underwent 2 months of conferences before the bill was presented to President Harrison sans the attached House ammendment. He signed it, and the bill became law on July 2, 1890.

footnote for all content above: Law and Economic Policy in America: The Evolution of the Sherman Antitrust Act by William Letwin

I believe the original version of the law contained 7 sections.
(footnote: "Abolition of Antitrust" by Gary Hull)

Alan Greenspan says: DOWN WITH SHERMAN!

"No one will ever know what new products, processes, machines, and cost-saving mergers failed to come into existence, killed by the Sherman Act before they were born. No one can ever compute the price that all of us have paid for that Act which, by inducing less effective use of capital, has kept our standard of living lower than would otherwise have been possible." -- Alan Greenspan

(from an essay he wrote called "Antitrust")