Nader Attacks Monopolies, Criticizes Harvard Jurist

Ralph Nader charged Saturday in Washington that American business monopolies are bilking the public of billions of dollars annually and that the Federal Government has been doing little or nothing to stop them.

A team of Nader's investigators headed by Mark J. Green, a 1970 graduate of Harvard Law School, and including six other Law students or graduates and one student in the GSAS, has issued a 1148-page report on the monopolies entitled "The Closed Enterprise System."

The report charges that monopolistic practices have led to higher consumer prices, low buying power and low production, pollution, and a lack of innovation in business.

The report also claims that actual and "shared" monopolies-where up to four companies control more than 50 per cent of production or up to eight control more than 70 per cent-have immense political power to protect themselves from regulation.

The report examines the extent of regulations in the form of antitrust actions over the past 20 years, under Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. Those Government officials who come under the heaviest attack for their antitrust laxity are Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, A???orney General under Johnson, and his assistant in charge of the Antitrust Division, Donald F. Turner.

Turner has now returned to his post as professor at the Harvard Law School, where he taught Green in his course on Economic Regulation.

The report cites numerous attempts-most of them unsuccessful-by business representatives or sympathetic government officials to block actions against monopolistic practices.

Green cites at least two instances in which Turner neglected to take "appropriate" antitrust actions.

"I don't necessarily think that Turner was responding to political pressures." Green said yesterday, "but I do think that he lacked enforcement courage."

Cites GM Immunity

For example, Green's report charges that Turner, like those who came before and after him, failed to take action to break up the General Motors Corporation although in writings published before and since his term as Assistant Attorney General Turner has recommended action against monopolies similar to GM and suggested possible legal bases for such action.

"All during his time in the Antitrust Division there were people on Turner's staff coming up with solidly-based cases against GM on the issue of bigness," Green said yesterday.

Turner Replies

Turner replied yesterday that it was possible he had not given the problem of auto monopolies a high enough priority during his tenure. "But I never thought any of the cases which were thought up were of much value. It's only been since leaving office that I've studied the problem to my satisfaction," Turner added.

Turner also criticized Green's report for failing to consider the broad social and economic implications of the ac-tions it recommends, such as the breakup of the auto industry. "Disagreements on these cases were very real-they were not simply political. I don't know of one single antitrust case which was dropped for what I would call venal political reasons," Turner said.

Katzenbach. Turner's superior who was singled out by the Green report, has been equally critical of it. He has condemned the report for massive factual inaccuracy, and has stated, according to Green, that "he knows a lot more about antitrust law than any kid one year out of Harvard Law."

Hallucinations

Another subject of criticism. Attorney General John M??t??, said of the report in an NBC News interview last night. "Nader's having hallucinations."

As yet there has been little official reaction to the measures which the Nader report proposes to combat the monopolies. These include mandatory public disclosure of all meetings between government and business concerning antitrust cases; stronger penahlties; the creation of a new antitrust agency which would consolidate the efforts of the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission; an immediate ban on any further mergers by the 500 largest .U.S. corporations: and a break-up of shared monopolies.