Nevada's T-Mobile Deal and the State of Antitrust Law

Walter OlsonT-Mobile and Sprint, the #3 and #4 wireless carriers, would like to combine so as to more effectively compete with Verizon and AT&T, the two dominant players in the cellular service market. Various states went to court against the merger,  arguing (dubiously) that the combination would harm consumers and drive up prices. And now, viaReuters, this:Also on Monday, Nevada said it would withdraw from the lawsuit in exchange for early deployment of the next generation of wireless in the state, creation of 450 jobs for six years and a $30 million donation to be distributed by Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford and aimed at helping women and minorities, Ford ’s office said.How blatant can you get? The best touch, of course, is the $30 million fund with which to ingratiate lucky beneficiaries around the state. ( “The recipients of these grants for the use of the charitable contributionwill be at the discretion of Nevada ’s attorney general” — that is, the same AG Ford who filed and settled the state’s case, and from whose press release is excerpted that sentence.) It looks a lot like the familiar cozytown set-up in many cities in which permission to build a large development or win a public contract just might call for a hefty donation to a local nonprofit with ties to the mayor and council.Notwithstanding the best efforts from some quarters to developper se rules in hopes of generating clear and predictable legal outcomes, antitrust law remains a world of su...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs