Joe Biden calls himself a “trusted buster” of the 21st century

Top supporters of Joe Biden insist he is the most progressive president of the United States since his reformist predecessor Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Now Biden is trying to place himself in a tradition that includes not only FDR, but also his cousin Theodore Roosevelt, the “trusted buster” who instigated the breakup of Standard Oil in 1906, as embarks what the White House says will be a generational shift in U.S. competition policy.

Biden sponsors say the 72 actions of the presidential order signed on Friday, which include everything related to airline ticket sales policies for the import of cheaper prescription drugs, constitute one of the most dramatic challenges for to the power of large corporations from either Roosevelt.

They argue that while many of the individual articles in the order may not seem so radical, the general document is an explosion against the Reaganite doctrine that companies should be allowed to be as large as they want while consumers suffer.

Many of these measures are small beers. You will now know each of the costs of a plane ticket. And what?

Rather, Biden and his advisers want competition regulators to consider the effect of corporate power not only on customers, but also on workers, suppliers, and smaller rivals.

“This is the biggest change in competition policy since then [Ronald] Reagan came in, “said Barry Lynn, director of the Open Markets Institute and one of a small group of left-wing thinkers who influenced last week’s order.” For the first time in 50 years, we we are making it available to the political economy. “

Heather Boushey, a member of the Biden Council of Economic Advisers, said: “Ensuring that the boy has the opportunity to participate in the economy; that there is an open and uniform playing field: these are important values ​​that [the president] brought to all our conversations “.

The order included instructions and guidance for various government agencies urging them to take action in various sectors. For example, the president told the Food and Drug Administration to work with states to find a way to safely import drugs from Canada in an attempt to lower the prices charged by drug manufacturers in the U.S.

However, this measure is not new. The US Department of Health issued a rule last year, while Donald Trump was still in office allowing the import of drugs from Canada. But the power to authorize specific purchase proposals from states and other health authorities rests with the FDA, which rarely grants such approvals.

Biden also “encouraged” the Federal Trade Commission to explore how it can reduce the use of so-called non-compete clauses that prevent workers from moving from one employer to another. These clauses have been used by companies like Amazon, which say they need them to protect trade secrets. But the president says they have been mistreated to keep wages low.

Non-compete clauses are restricted in some states, but FTC Democrats believe they also have the legal authority to set federal limits. The question now is whether the commission chooses to ban its use directly or whether it takes more limited measures by limiting them only to lower-wage workers.

“The order doesn’t say ban, it says reduce,” a senior White House official said. “So it leaves the door open to some kind of more limited action.”

Some critics say the White House does not have the power to push for such a broad reform of antitrust policy, noting that Trump was unable to fulfill his repeated promise to lower drug prices with measures, including re-importation.

Others argue that the package is a mixture of minor solutions and more ambitious policy measures that are unlikely to withstand scrutiny by Congress or the courts.

Rob Atkinson, president of the Foundation for Information Technology and Innovation, a think tank in support of the technology industry, said: “Many of these measures are small beer. You will now know each of the costs of a plane ticket. And what? “

Still, taken in its entirety, the order sends a signal to the thousands of government officials involved in government policy-making.

For example, it instructs the Secretary of Agriculture to “reinforce” the view that it is illegal for large agricultural companies to give preference to one farmer over another, even if there is no effect on the entire industry.

It also encourages the FTC to account for “unfair data collection and surveillance practices” by large technology companies when deciding whether to take enforcement action against them.

These articles reflect the view of many progressives that regulators have been too reluctant to take antitrust measures where they cannot demonstrate any obvious harm to consumers, such as rising prices.

But judges have often been skeptical of this interpretation of existing antitrust laws. Last month, a federal judge he dismissed a complaint by the FTC against Facebook because it said regulators had not done enough to prove the company was dominant in its market.

Many expect strict proof of this theory if Lina Khan, the FTC chief appointed by Biden, launches a case against Amazon, a company she has frequently criticized in the past for abusing its market power.

If Khan manages to break Facebook or Amazon, he is likely to be remembered in the same way as the Standard Oil case filed by Theodore Roosevelt’s administration.

But even if she and the Biden administration fail to win a relevant case, many supporters believe the debate over the power of American corporations will change forever.

Sarah Miller, executive director of the American Economic Liberties Project, said, “This order. . . it breaks 40 years of consensus on how the government should interact with businesses.

“It’s even more substantial because it was Joe Biden, and not one of the Democrats we think of as part of the progressive wing, who signed it.”