Identifying, Challenging, and Assigning Political Responsibility for State Regulation Restricting Competition
Maureen Ohlhausen, Nov 01, 2006
This paper examines the role of competition advocacy in combating anticompetitive state regulation. Looking at the constraints facing competition officials such as the state action doctrine, the analysis suggests potential avenues for surmounting these constraints. Relying on experience as the Director of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s Office of Policy Planning, the author uses real-world examples—real estate brokerage and interstate direct shipment of wine—to demonstrate the ability of a competition agency to use a variety of techniques to improve consumer welfare when enforcement is circumscribed due to state activity.
Featured News
Apartment Giants AvalonBay, Equity Weigh $50 Billion Merger
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
Apple Challenges Indian Competition Regulator Over Financial Data Demand in Antitrust Case
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
EU Judges Leave Final Decision on Portuguese Football Hiring Pact to National Court
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
State AGs Form Bipartisan Task Force To Support Guardrails Around AI
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
Brazil Opens Antitrust Case Into Alleged Airline Price Coordination
Apr 30, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Unilateral Effects
Apr 28, 2026 by
CPI
A Net Present Value Approach to Merger Analysis
Apr 28, 2026 by
Joseph J Simons & Malcolm Coate
Generative AI and Competitive Disruption: Increasingly Relevant for Merger Analysis?
Apr 28, 2026 by
Andrea Coscelli, Emily Chissell, Nitika Bagaria & Tega Akati-Udi
Non-Price Unilateral Effects In Media Mergers
Apr 28, 2026 by
Lapo Filistrucchi & Teresa Oriani
Ecosystem Mergers and Unilateral Effects? A Framework for Assessing the Ecosystem Theory of Harm
Apr 28, 2026 by
Ethel Fonseca, George Tucker & Helder Vasconcelos