Controlling Unjustified, Anticompetitive State and Local Regulation: Where is Attorney General “Waldo”?
State and local regulations frequently impose unnecessary anticompetitive restrictions on the market. The challenge is to develop the legal and institutional strategies that can constrain regulation more closely to legitimate public interest goals. This article documents the range of anticompetitive...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Antitrust bulletin 2011-12, Vol.56 (4), p.771-821 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 821 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 771 |
container_title | Antitrust bulletin |
container_volume | 56 |
creator | Carstensen, Peter C. |
description | State and local regulations frequently impose unnecessary anticompetitive restrictions on the market. The challenge is to develop the legal and institutional strategies that can constrain regulation more closely to legitimate public interest goals. This article documents the range of anticompetitive interventions ranging from statutes through agency regulation and local ordinances. The theory of public choice and special interest influence in the legislative and administrative processes explain these observations. Second, the article argues that state attorneys general ought to be in the forefront of challenging such regulations, but the record reveals that often attorneys general defend such regulations. Third, the article identifies statutory, doctrinal, and institutional innovations that could ensure more focused and consistent evaluation of such anticompetitive regulations. Finally, there is acknowledgment that it may be difficult for attorneys general to become the advocates for competition against unnecessary regulation that the public interest requires. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0003603X1105600404 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A288873475</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A288873475</galeid><sage_id>10.1177_0003603X1105600404</sage_id><sourcerecordid>A288873475</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-cd94b2c9f903859e8401e6c4e0f313a130c92b4a3e5e1a8f272286c3df3be6c53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcFKAzEQQIMoWKs_4Cng1W2TzXZ340VK0SoUBLXU25JmJ2vqNpEkFXrrh-jP9UvcpV7EInMYZnhvGGYQOqekR2mW9QkhLCXshVIySAlJSHKAOpQzEmU85Yeo0wJRSxyjE-8XTUlJmnfQ28ia4Gxda1PhqVmsfNBKQ3mJhyZoaZfvEHTQH4CfggiAhSnxxEpR40eoVrUI2porPHsFB1h7PAzBOgNrPAYDrqG2m8-ZqEu73Xxdn6IjJWoPZz-5i6a3N8-ju2jyML4fDSeRjDkNkSx5Mo8lV5ywfMAhTwiFVCZAFKNMUEYkj-eJYDAAKnIVZ3Gcp5KVis0bbsC66GI3txI1FNooG5yQS-1lMYzzPM9YkrVUtIeqdntbA0o37V98bw_fRAnL5lD7hHgnSGe9d6CKd6eXwq0LSor2a8XfrzVSfyd5UUGxsCtnmlP9Z3wD9LKYhA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Controlling Unjustified, Anticompetitive State and Local Regulation: Where is Attorney General “Waldo”?</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Carstensen, Peter C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Carstensen, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><description>State and local regulations frequently impose unnecessary anticompetitive restrictions on the market. The challenge is to develop the legal and institutional strategies that can constrain regulation more closely to legitimate public interest goals. This article documents the range of anticompetitive interventions ranging from statutes through agency regulation and local ordinances. The theory of public choice and special interest influence in the legislative and administrative processes explain these observations. Second, the article argues that state attorneys general ought to be in the forefront of challenging such regulations, but the record reveals that often attorneys general defend such regulations. Third, the article identifies statutory, doctrinal, and institutional innovations that could ensure more focused and consistent evaluation of such anticompetitive regulations. Finally, there is acknowledgment that it may be difficult for attorneys general to become the advocates for competition against unnecessary regulation that the public interest requires.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-603X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1930-7969</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0003603X1105600404</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Attorneys general ; Influence ; Monopolistic competition ; Political aspects ; Powers and duties ; Public choice theory ; Public interest</subject><ispartof>Antitrust bulletin, 2011-12, Vol.56 (4), p.771-821</ispartof><rights>2011 SAGE Publications</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2011 Sage Publications, Inc.</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0003603X1105600404$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003603X1105600404$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carstensen, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><title>Controlling Unjustified, Anticompetitive State and Local Regulation: Where is Attorney General “Waldo”?</title><title>Antitrust bulletin</title><description>State and local regulations frequently impose unnecessary anticompetitive restrictions on the market. The challenge is to develop the legal and institutional strategies that can constrain regulation more closely to legitimate public interest goals. This article documents the range of anticompetitive interventions ranging from statutes through agency regulation and local ordinances. The theory of public choice and special interest influence in the legislative and administrative processes explain these observations. Second, the article argues that state attorneys general ought to be in the forefront of challenging such regulations, but the record reveals that often attorneys general defend such regulations. Third, the article identifies statutory, doctrinal, and institutional innovations that could ensure more focused and consistent evaluation of such anticompetitive regulations. Finally, there is acknowledgment that it may be difficult for attorneys general to become the advocates for competition against unnecessary regulation that the public interest requires.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Attorneys general</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Monopolistic competition</subject><subject>Political aspects</subject><subject>Powers and duties</subject><subject>Public choice theory</subject><subject>Public interest</subject><issn>0003-603X</issn><issn>1930-7969</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kcFKAzEQQIMoWKs_4Cng1W2TzXZ340VK0SoUBLXU25JmJ2vqNpEkFXrrh-jP9UvcpV7EInMYZnhvGGYQOqekR2mW9QkhLCXshVIySAlJSHKAOpQzEmU85Yeo0wJRSxyjE-8XTUlJmnfQ28ia4Gxda1PhqVmsfNBKQ3mJhyZoaZfvEHTQH4CfggiAhSnxxEpR40eoVrUI2porPHsFB1h7PAzBOgNrPAYDrqG2m8-ZqEu73Xxdn6IjJWoPZz-5i6a3N8-ju2jyML4fDSeRjDkNkSx5Mo8lV5ywfMAhTwiFVCZAFKNMUEYkj-eJYDAAKnIVZ3Gcp5KVis0bbsC66GI3txI1FNooG5yQS-1lMYzzPM9YkrVUtIeqdntbA0o37V98bw_fRAnL5lD7hHgnSGe9d6CKd6eXwq0LSor2a8XfrzVSfyd5UUGxsCtnmlP9Z3wD9LKYhA</recordid><startdate>20111222</startdate><enddate>20111222</enddate><creator>Carstensen, Peter C.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ILT</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111222</creationdate><title>Controlling Unjustified, Anticompetitive State and Local Regulation: Where is Attorney General “Waldo”?</title><author>Carstensen, Peter C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-cd94b2c9f903859e8401e6c4e0f313a130c92b4a3e5e1a8f272286c3df3be6c53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Attorneys general</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Monopolistic competition</topic><topic>Political aspects</topic><topic>Powers and duties</topic><topic>Public choice theory</topic><topic>Public interest</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carstensen, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><jtitle>Antitrust bulletin</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carstensen, Peter C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Controlling Unjustified, Anticompetitive State and Local Regulation: Where is Attorney General “Waldo”?</atitle><jtitle>Antitrust bulletin</jtitle><date>2011-12-22</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>771</spage><epage>821</epage><pages>771-821</pages><issn>0003-603X</issn><eissn>1930-7969</eissn><abstract>State and local regulations frequently impose unnecessary anticompetitive restrictions on the market. The challenge is to develop the legal and institutional strategies that can constrain regulation more closely to legitimate public interest goals. This article documents the range of anticompetitive interventions ranging from statutes through agency regulation and local ordinances. The theory of public choice and special interest influence in the legislative and administrative processes explain these observations. Second, the article argues that state attorneys general ought to be in the forefront of challenging such regulations, but the record reveals that often attorneys general defend such regulations. Third, the article identifies statutory, doctrinal, and institutional innovations that could ensure more focused and consistent evaluation of such anticompetitive regulations. Finally, there is acknowledgment that it may be difficult for attorneys general to become the advocates for competition against unnecessary regulation that the public interest requires.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0003603X1105600404</doi><tpages>51</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-603X |
ispartof | Antitrust bulletin, 2011-12, Vol.56 (4), p.771-821 |
issn | 0003-603X 1930-7969 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A288873475 |
source | Access via SAGE; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Analysis Attorneys general Influence Monopolistic competition Political aspects Powers and duties Public choice theory Public interest |
title | Controlling Unjustified, Anticompetitive State and Local Regulation: Where is Attorney General “Waldo”? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T15%3A14%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Controlling%20Unjustified,%20Anticompetitive%20State%20and%20Local%20Regulation:%20Where%20is%20Attorney%20General%20%E2%80%9CWaldo%E2%80%9D?&rft.jtitle=Antitrust%20bulletin&rft.au=Carstensen,%20Peter%20C.&rft.date=2011-12-22&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=771&rft.epage=821&rft.pages=771-821&rft.issn=0003-603X&rft.eissn=1930-7969&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0003603X1105600404&rft_dat=%3Cgale_cross%3EA288873475%3C/gale_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A288873475&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0003603X1105600404&rfr_iscdi=true |