Department of Justice's Irresponsible Rhetoric
In a recent letter to Congress, the Department of Justice (DOJ) expressed its support for various antitrust bills that would require large U.S. tech firms to aid their domestic and foreign competitors. While agencies frequently signal support for bills, DOJ’s rhetoric crossed a line.
The Department wrote that America’s large tech companies “present a threat to … our democracy.” According to DOJ, these firms “control key arteries of the nation’s commerce and communications” and “contravene the foundations of our capitalist system.” As a result, DOJ claims that these companies “ultimately threaten the economic liberty that undergirds our democracy.”
DOJ’s rhetoric is erroneous, overwrought, and dangerous. In the first place, America’s leading technology companies have strengthened democracies both at home and around the globe from hostile foreign attacks. At a meeting last year with President Biden, America’s leading technology companies committed to spending tens of billions of dollars to upgrade our defenses and to train thousands of cybersecurity professionals. Abroad, American companies are supporting brave Ukrainians in their effort to counter Russian disinformation.
Current antitrust bills, notionally endorsed by DOJ, would require American firms to share sensitive data with competitors from China and Russia and could hinder efforts to remove Russian apps and propaganda sites from their platforms. How, exactly, would it promote democracy to assist state-affiliated Chinese and Russian companies?
Beyond substantive problems with the legislation, DOJ’s overheated rhetoric returns the federal government to a posture of open hostility to the private sector. At a time when autocracies are flexing their muscles, it is astonishing that the Department of Justice would accuse America’s private sector, led by American executives and largely owned by American shareholders, of threatening democracy.
For the past four decades, U.S. antitrust laws have guarded against the politicization of antitrust laws and the demonization of private companies. A bipartisan consensus, embraced across administrations, has kept the focus on consumers. If a large company’s business practices demonstrably hurt consumers, the courts may well forbid those practices. If those same practices upset that company’s competitors, or politicians, the courts will shrug, because antitrust says the consumer is king.
Unfortunately, DOJ is now using irresponsible rhetoric in support of deeply flawed antitrust bills that would hamstring vigorous competition and, at a time of rampant inflation, could well lead to higher prices. Today, the government is villainizing big tech platforms. In the past, the government has villainized big food, big pharma, big oil, and even big shoe. Tomorrow, the villain could be whatever industry the party in power wants to bring to heel — and if DOJ’s antitrust authority is expanded, it will have the tools to do so.
There are open and honest policy debates to be had about competition and the digital transformation of the economy. But it is corrosive for the U.S. Department of Justice to engage in these debates with irresponsible, over the top, and politically charged rhetoric.
Sean Heather is senior vice president for International Regulatory Affairs and Antitrust at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He leads the Chamber’s Center for Global Regulatory Cooperation (GRC), which seeks to align trade, regulatory, and competition policy in support of open and competitive markets, and oversees the organization’s antitrust policy on behalf of its members.
