Question

From The Law of Healthcare Administration 8th Edition (2012) by Showalter - Chapter 12

1. Name and describe the per se violations of antitrust law.

2. Define the rule of reason and describe when it is used.

3. In today’s economy, what are some examples of intrastate commerce? In other words, what business does not affect interstate commerce?

4. How would you define the geographic and product markets of large healthcare organizations such as Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, and Johns Hopkins? What are new competitors’ barriers to entry to those markets?

5. Why is a case like In the Matter of Evanston not likely to arise often in the future?

Answer 1

As per the HOMEWORKLIB POLICY, I have answered the first question only:

1. For the most part, per se violations that disregard antitrust law, which is the most widely recognized, are price-fixing or bid-rigging. The two practices are innately against the opportunity of interstate business. Price fixing happens when at least two organizations connive to set a standard price; typically profanely low, at that point climbing to a more significant expense. At first, rival organizations inside a similar market can contrive or even go into composed understandings to both misleadingly set the price of their products low, exceptionally low now and again.

While it might cause a money related misfortune to the organizations at first, it very well may be made upon the back end by driving up the price. Setting the price low and controlling most of the piece of the pie between the two adversary organizations will constrain their littler rivals bankrupt. When their rivals are bankrupt, they would then be able to set the price higher while holding a bigger piece of the overall industry for the two substances, picking up monetarily all the while. This seriously compels interstate trade, the same number of the littler contenders can't continue the misleadingly lower price.

The other structure that typically abuses antitrust law concerns bid-rigging. Organizations don't control each phase of their assembling procedure. Much of the time, this is contracted out to littler firms to, for instance, make the metal that will be used to frame a vehicle entryway. Bid rigging happens when the vehicle maker contrives with a metal plant before an open rivalry for the agreement. In these cases, both the vehicle fabricate and the contriving metal works plant to win.

Rather than an open, reasonable rivalry, a producer definitely realizes the agreement will come to them since they made certain concessions and arrangements in indirect access gatherings with the element selling the agreement. While this will profit those two gatherings, it controls interstate trade since the other practical alternatives for the agreement have, in essence, as of now been rejected from the procedure. While an act of bid selection may happen to give the hallucination of legitimateness, the result is as of now chose.

The two types of violations fall under the per se rule since they are evident infractions to interstate business, controlling the capacity of contenders to operate inside the structure of a reasonable free market. While these models essentially outline limitations on interstate business, a similar rationale applies to outside exchange or trade also. Since the Sherman Act is a Federal rule, all violators of antitrust law are accused and prosecuted of crimes.