European regulators assessing the proposed merger of Sony Corp.’s Sony Music Entertainment and Bertelsmann AG’s BMG appear to be grappling with a basic issue: Should the combined company be considered just a developer and marketer of artists? Or should it instead be considered an integral part of the broader media-and-entertainment empires of both parents?
. . .
A questionnaire sent by EU officials to other players in the music industry last week provides some insight into the EU’s lines of inquiry . . . [t]he document [] asks how the recorded-music market is affected by such television formats as Britain’s “Pop Idol.” A production company owned by Bertelsmann produces “Pop Idol” and its cousins, including “American Idol” on News Corp.’s Fox network in the U.S. Winners of those shows record on BMG, and their albums have been big sellers.

“The argument by opponents of the merger is that these TV shows take unknown artists and make them household names at very low cost, and that gives them an unfair advantage” over other music companies, says Lorna Tilbian, a media analyst at Numis Securities in London.

Oracle has been laboring to conclude its $7.3 billion hostile takeover bid for software competitor PeopleSoft for about seven months. PeopleSoft hasn’t made things easy, with its lawsuit and its refusal to allow its shareholders to vote on the offer. But the real headache has come courtesy of the Justice Department Antitrust Division, which has been probing the deal with its usual largo tempo and seems to be searching for a reason to say no.

Perhaps [Oracle CEO Larry] Ellison should ask [Microsoft chairman Bill] Gates for advice. Oracle was, after all, one of the leaders of the high-tech tong that invited Justice to make itself at home in Silicon Valley. It didn’t like competing against Microsoft, so it called in the Clinton Administration’s legal hobblers to help. But instead of leaving town after they pounded Microsoft, the lawyers and bureaucrats have settled in and are now looking for new markets to deconstruct.

President Bush will seek a big increase in the budget of the National Endowment for the Arts, the largest single source of support for the arts in the United States, administration officials said on Wednesday.

The proposal is part of a turnaround for the agency, which was once fighting for its life, attacked by some Republicans as a threat to the nation's moral standards.

Laura Bush plans to announce the request on Thursday, in remarks intended to show the administration's commitment to the arts, aides said.

Administration officials, including White House budget experts, said that Mr. Bush would propose an increase of $15 million to $20 million for the coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. That would be the largest rise in two decades and far more than the most recent increases, about $500,000 for 2003 and $5 million for this year.

Dump Quayle rumors popped up at the drop of a hat . . . In the middle of our defense of our Veep, the campaign received a bombshell. All previous data had shown that the vice-presidential candidate had no statistical impact on an election, one way or another. Now, for the first time in modern polling, data indicated that a vice president—Quayle—was a drag on the ticket.
. . .

Though this secret memo included several modifying caveats (e.g., press and party reaction, which might mitigate the positive effects of removing him), its findings were so unique and unsettling that they reopened the debate among Bush’s closest friends. It took several forms: Move Quayle to Defense, Defense Secretary Dick Cheney to State, Secretary of State Jim Baker to chief of staff; or, get Quayle off, put Colin Powell on.

"He's really been a disaster, possibly the worst commissioner I've seen," said Dr. Sydney Wolfe, director of health research at consumer group Public Citizen in Washington. "He is more well-liked by the pharmaceutical industry than any other commissioner I can remember."

The FTC proposes to adopt a rule prescribing the phrase “SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT-CONTENT: ” as the mark or notice mandated by the CAN-SPAM Act. The proposed rule also would follow the intention of the CAN-SPAM Act to protect consumers from unwitting exposure to pornographic images in spam, by requiring this mark to be included both in the subject line of any e-mail message that contains sexually oriented material, and in the electronic equivalent of a “brown paper wrapper” in the body of the message. This “brown paper wrapper” would be what a recipient would initially see when opening a message containing sexually oriented material. It would include the prescribed mark or notice, certain other specified information, and no other information or images.

Once upon a time, Republicans believed in leaving it to the private and voluntary sectors to do the important work of building citizenship and values. Remember the "thousand points of light?" These days those lightbulbs need government subsidies. One of the key beliefs of this President is that federal money should be funneled to religious groups that blend proselytizing with important social work. His faith-based initiative largely withered on the vine, but he has done what he can. In last year's State of the Union message, he proposed almost half a billion dollars to pay for mentors for disadvantaged high school students or the children of prisoners. This year he proposed an extensive government program to coach newly released ex-cons into better lives. Ever wonder who these government-backed mentors are? And what exactly they're preaching? Maybe you should, because you're paying for them.

It is generally understood that those who support the "conservatives," expect them to uphold the system which has been camouflaged by the loose term of "the American way of life." The moral treason of the "conservative" leaders lies in the fact that they are hiding behind that camouflage: they do not have the courage to admit that the American way of life was capitalism, that that was the politico-economic system born and established in the United States, the system which, in one brief century, achieved a level of freedom, of progress, of prosperity, of human happiness, unmatched in all the other systems and centuries combined--and that that is the system which they are now allowing to perish by silent default.

If the "conservatives" do not stand for capitalism, they stand for and are nothing; they have no goal, no direction, no political principles, no social ideals, no intellectual values, no leadership to offer anyone.

Yet capitalism is what the "conservatives" dare not advocate or defend. They are paralyzed by the profound conflict between capitalism and the moral code which dominates our culture: the morality of altruism. Altruism holds that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue, and value. Capitalism and altruism are incompatible; they are philosophical opposites; they cannot co-exist in the same man or in the same society. The conflict between capitalism and altruism has been undercutting America from her start and, today, has reached its climax.

There has always been a tension in conservatism between those who favor more liberty and those who want more morality. But what's indisputable is that Bush's "compassionate conservatism" is a move toward the latter--the use of the government to impose and subsidize certain morals over others. He is fusing Big Government liberalism with religious-right moralism. It's the nanny state with more cash. Your cash, that is. And their morals.

Among the limitations placed by Judge Miriam Goldman Cederbaum [on Martha Stewart's defense team] were the inability to say that the home decorating expert was being prosecuted for proclaiming her innocence in the case or for asserting her First Amendment right to free speech.

The defense also is barred from saying that the securities fraud charge Stewart faces is a novel application of securities laws, and from making statements that would tend to show the government's motives in investigating or prosecuting Stewart were improper. The defense also can't say that the fact Stewart and former broker Peter Bacanovic aren't facing criminal insider trading charges means the government doesn't believe they committed such a crime.

According to presidential candidate Al Sharpton, "The top one percent in this country pays very much less than ten percent, very much less than five percent."

Sharpton said he thinks the wealthy should pay "somewhere around 15 percent."

But that's so silly because — and I bet most of you don't know this — the IRS says the richest 1 percent of taxpayers already pay 34 percent of all income taxes. Twice what Sharpton wanted them to pay.

Still you may feel the rich should pay even more. It's a tempting thought, since they have so much.

But let's remember the facts: the top 1 percent of Americans — those who earn more than about $300,000 a year — pay 34 percent, more than a third of all income taxes, and the top 5 percent, those making over $125,000, pay more than half.

California's skewed income distribution, combined with progressive tax rates, means that the people at the very top of the income heap pay a very high percentage of the personal income tax collected in this state.

Their extraordinary, onetime income surge at the end of the last century provided most of the new tax revenue that legislators and former Gov. Gray Davis used to raise teacher salaries, increase welfare benefits and expand eligibility to state-provided health care. But the decline that followed also accounted for most of the revenue drop that contributed to the state's fiscal crisis. And as of the most recent tax year, they hadn't hit bottom yet.

The million-dollar earners peaked in 2000, when 44,000 of them -- about enough to fill your average baseball stadium -- reported incomes totaling $172 billion and paid more than $15 billion in taxes. The tax take from that relative handful of returns accounted for more than one-third of all income tax paid in the state.

The next year, the number of returns reporting incomes that high slumped to 29,000. Their combined income also declined, by nearly half, to $95 billion. And here was the killer: Their tax liability dropped from $15 billion to just under $8 billion.

The assets purchased by OWRS include seven profitable events at Long Beach, Calif., Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Monterrey, Mexico and Surfer's Paradise, Australia, that draw big crowds. Cleveland made a bit of a comeback this season and Elkhart Lake remains the truest test of road racing in North America. St. Petersburg showed great potential in its debut.
They're all worth saving, plus Milwaukee, which the IRL is already going to for the first time in 2004.

Putting those 10 with the IRL's best tracks (Texas, Kentucky, Kansas City, Chicago, Phoenix, Fontana, Motegi and Indy) might be the kind of mix that would reinvigorate fans, manufacturers, drivers and sponsors.

"Let's go by the theory that open wheel racing will be unified again," said [Paul] Gentilozzi, who does most of the talking for OWRS. "We need a 20-race season with 10 great road courses or street circuits and 10 great ovals.

Let me turn now to the opportunity we have to combat one of the most serious health issues facing Delawareans: cancer...We now know, thanks to research completed this year, that cancer victims without health insurance receive less than 60 percent of the health care that cancer patients with health insurance get. This means that health insurance for cancer victims can be the difference between life and death...I am asking the General Assembly to make Delaware the first state in the country to guarantee health insurance for every person in the state diagnosed with cancer. Some will say, “no other state has done it.” To them I say, it’s about time that someone did, and Delaware will lead the way.

The arena is merely one part of an ambitious development plan crafted by Ratner. The well-known developer built the MetroTech Center in Brooklyn, home to the city's fire department headquarters, along with banking and other offices.

The 19,000-seat arena would sit amid thousands of apartments, hundreds of thousands of square feet of shopping space and more than 2 million square feet of offices. Most of the $2.5 billion project would sit atop a Long Island Railroad yard owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, a state agency controlled by Pataki.

From the state, Ratner needs both air rights and a condemnation power to take nearby homes and businesses. The developer estimates about 150 homes would be affected, although neighbors fear the number would be higher.

Residents of the upscale neighborhood of Prospect Heights, which adjoins the site, have promised to sue to block what they said would be an unconstitutional use of the government's eminent domain power for private rather than public benefit.

An MTA official said Ratner had yet to formally approach the agency and it was far from certain that the agency would sell him the air rights, let alone provide them at less than market price.

The state's role could allow Ratner to avoid much of the city's lengthy and stringent land-use approval process. Opponents charge that's one of a number of advantages bestowed on Ratner because of his political connections.

Ratner has held high-level positions in two mayoral administrations, and was once appointed by Pataki to study the possibility of luring the Dodgers back to Brooklyn.

A government-run health care system is the wrong prescription. By keeping costs under control, expanding access, and helping more Americans afford coverage, we will preserve the system of private medicine that makes America’s heath care the best in the world.

The Department of Justice's Antitrust Division appears prepared to block Oracle's proposed $7.3 billion merger with PeopleSoft on the grounds of monopoly power in "business enterprise software." Similarly, a merger between EchoStar and DirecTV was halted. State attorneys general and even the European Union are increasingly scrutinizing mergers in the technology sector. Clearly, the Microsoft settlement did not end antitrust activism.

If Washington policymakers conclude that the technology marketplace is incapable of policing itself and that corporate breakup or aggressive market-definition policies qualify as sensible public policy, then what government intervention in the technology sector markets is off limits? Many economists object to such intervention in new business models—especially when the theories behind intervention are themselves highly questionable.

What does the future hold for technology companies and the competitive environment? Join us as our panelists analyze and debate the broader role of antitrust policy in the high-tech economy and a possible reform agenda.

"Question: Do your children attend public or private schools?

"Answer: Public schools. Public school education in this country is excellent. I'm tired of right-wing politicians bashing the public school system whose failures are often due to lack of attention to early childhood education between the ages of zero and three."

John Kerry, battling in a leadoff contest far too close to call, said Saturday that rivals for the Democratic nomination for president are trying to dampen his momentum with a "smear effort."

Two other candidates, Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt, circulated to reporters on Friday comments Kerry made five years ago indicating he would drastically scale back the U.S. Department of Agriculture and revamp farm subsidies. Iowa is dominated by farming, and politicians of all stripes here support subsidy programs. [AP] (empasis added)

One of the most important provisions of the antitrust settlement negotiated with Microsoft Corp. is falling short of the federal government's hopes that it would energize rivals of the world's largest software maker, the Justice Department acknowledged Friday.

U.S. antitrust lawyers told the trial judge they are increasingly uneasy that efforts to persuade competitors to license Microsoft's Windows technology for their own software products "are not likely to spur the emergence in the marketplace of broad competitors to the Windows desktop."

The landmark antitrust settlement compels Microsoft to offer its technology to competitors to build products that seamlessly communicate with computers running Windows software. When the settlement was negotiated, the judge and government lawyers described that requirement as among its most significant provisions toward restoring competition in the technology industry.

Government lawyers told U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in court papers that Microsoft's licensing agreements have turned out too complex and potentially too expensive for competitors.

The Justice Department said Microsoft has agreed to change the agreements. But even after changes are made, government lawyers warned, Microsoft "cannot foresee with confidence that the improvements will be sufficient and remove the need for further changes."

Microsoft said it will lower prices and make agreements as attractive as possible for its business rivals, but it argued that it shouldn't be held responsible if competitors choose not to use its Windows technology for their products.

Unsatisfied that the license offers were effective enough, the trial judge urged government lawyers in October to investigate why only nine companies had paid Microsoft for licenses. The government said Friday that number has climbed to 11, and Microsoft said it was negotiating with 20 more. [AP]

Shouting "no to America!" tens of thousands of Shiite Muslims took to the streets Thursday to protest a U.S.-backed formula for choosing Iraq's new legislature.

The protest came as an aide to Iraq's foremost Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, warned that he might issue a fatwa, or religious edict, rejecting a U.S.-backed government if his demands for direct elections are ignored.

The turnout in Basra, estimated by British soldiers at up to 30,000, was the biggest protest organized by Shiite clerics against the power transfer plan.

The United States wants regional caucuses to choose a new parliament, which will then select an Iraqi administration. It says security is too poor and voter records too incomplete for fair elections.

The clerics want direct elections, fearing the caucuses may be rigged to keep Shiites out of power.

The Americans are also wary of elections because of who might win. With Iraq in turmoil, Islamic radicals or Saddam Hussein's Baath party might dominate a vote simply because they have the best organizations. [AP]

The poor, oil-rich nation is considering decriminalizing the theft of food and medicine in cases where a thief is motivated by extreme hunger or need.

Supreme Court Judge Alejandro Angulo Fontiveros told Reuters on Wednesday that the so-called "famine theft" clause should be part of a broad penal code reform measure for humanitarian reasons.

"This is a guide for judges to avoid injustice," said Fontiveros, who is in charge of drafting the reforms. "They lock up for years a poor person who lives in atrocious misery and what they need is medicine."

Under Fontiveros' proposal to the Supreme Court, those who take food, medicine or inexpensive goods without using violence to ease hunger caused by prolonged, extreme poverty would not be punished.

"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world?' You are.

Government can make things better, but Government, too, can make a mess of things. It is particularly prone to the latter when addressing budding technology developments that it does not yet fully understand or appreciate. Regulation can smother the risk-taking oxygen young entrepreneurs need to survive. They can weigh down innovation with forms and filings and drain capital by adding significantly to the costs of the service. And the cost of government compliance can mean higher, less competitive, prices for consumers.

Communications is probably one of the most powerful attributes of mankind. Few capabilities in our society have a greater impact on our community than communications. Thus, as it has long been, communications policy is more than the efficient allocation of goods and resources. It is about people; their access to information and their development of community and personal relationships. I believe it a sacred duty to continue to protect important social values through the great digital migration.

First among equals is the unflinching commitment to universal service. We must make sure that the digital migration brings the technologies of today and tomorrow to every single American at affordable prices. This year we will continue to tackle important universal service reforms that ensure that the nation can continue to pass into a new era, while not sacrificing its inviolate commitment to all Americans.

In a speech prepared for delivery Wednesday, Bush is calling for a lunar base to be established within two decades and a manned landing on Mars sometime after 2030, an official said.

The proposal comes after members of Congress and others have called for a new national vision for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, urging a human space initiative that would reinvigorate an agency wounded by last year's loss of space shuttle Columbia and trapped by expensive projects that limit manned spaceflight to low Earth orbit.

Bush, speaking with reporters Tuesday on a trip to Mexico, said his plan centers on human exploration of space.

"The spirit is going to be one of continued exploration ... seeking new horizons and investing in a program that ... meets that objective," he said.

His proposal for $1 billion over five years, in effect, would provide startup funds for highly complex projects that could take decades and may require hundreds of billions of additional dollars to complete. [AP]

Antitrust laws in general, and the Sherman Act in particular, are the Magna Carta of free enterprise. They are as important to the preservation of economic freedom and our free-enterprise system as the Bill of Rights is to the protection of our fundamental personal freedoms. And the freedom guaranteed each and every business, no matter how small, is the freedom to compete - to assert with vigor, imagination, devotion, and ingenuity whatever economic muscle it can muster. Implicit in such freedom is the notion that it cannot be foreclosed with respect to one sector of the economy because certain private citizens or groups believe that such foreclosure might promote greater competition in a more important sector of the economy.

The president's muscular war powers asserted in the Hamdi case could conceivably occasion injustice against a few in pursuit of safety and freedom for hundreds of millions. Cases of mistaken identity are possible, although persuasive evidence of the same has yet to surface. And President Bush theoretically could contrive justifications for enemy combatant designations to punish dissenters or popularly disfavored minorities. But he has not done so. No credible evidence suggests the Guantanamo Bay or three illegal enemy combatant detainees have been imprisoned for nefarious reasons.

With history in mind, the Supreme Court will sustain presidential war powers in Hamdi and companion cases. The tiny risk of presidential overreaching is dwarfed by the urgency of crushing an enemy who keenly relishes civilian slaughters, fanaticism and the Stone Age.

When I saw this, I actually made an audible gasp that sounded so insincere Soap Opera actors could make it sound more credible. I have to say that I am shocked and angry. This is a complete outrage! As an American I respect people's freedom of speech and expression, but an out and out slight against servicemen goes too far. I think that the soldiers on the cover of time magazine ought to have the right to sue the "artist" who rendered this picture.

When Virginia tobacco farmer Mac L. Bailey started a cigarette manufacturing company 10 years ago, his business consisted of little more than a secret tobacco blend, a couple of hand-held rolling machines and a burning desire to take on the big tobacco companies that paid farmers like him a relative pittance for the lucrative product they grew.

"I saw years when I didn't have enough to pay my expenses," said Bailey, 60. "I looked at what the farmer was getting and what the big manufacturers were getting, and I said, 'That's too much money for the big guys.' "

Today, Bailey owns a private jet, and his company, S&M Brands of Keysville, Va., produces about 1 million cartons a month. The growth of discount cigarette companies such as Bailey's has reshaped the industry -- and led to an odd alliance between big tobacco companies and many of the states that sued them over the public cost of smoking.

Numerous states are considering or have adopted legislation aimed at increasing the price of discount cigarettes and protecting the market share of the "Big Four" tobacco companies -- Philip Morris, Lorillard, Brown & Williamson and R.J. Reynolds. The Big Four are vowing a push this year in the Virginia General Assembly.

What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to disseminate? > That there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in philosophy.

What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to combat? > That life should conform to a philosophy."

President Bush: Vowing to throw billions of taxpayer dollars at a wasteful federal bureaucracy is not "bold." It does not make you a "visionary." In fact, it only solidifies your place among all the other mediocre presidents who freely spent tax dollars in an effort to make themselves look grand.

Both the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission employ many lawyers whose job is to prevent monopolies. But what happens when there are no monopolies to prevent? Being able bureaucrats, these antitrust lawyers know that, to keep their jobs, they need to find monopolies, whether real or not. The way they do this is by defining a market more and more narrowly until they find a monopoly.

Imagine, if you will, an incredibly complex diagram covering a wall in the office of a Ph. D. at the FTC. The diagram is titled “The Market for Food,” and the hierarchical scheme branches from there to include every possible food group. Now erase everything that isn't under “The Market for Deserts,” and then erase everything that isn't below “The Market for Frozen Deserts,” and then erase everything that isn't beneath “The Market for Ice Cream.” Not much of the diagram remains (we're already down to something the size of a postage stamp). But now erase “The Market for Cheap-o Ice Cream,” “The Market for Regular Ice Cream,” and “The Market for Premium Ice Cream.” What you have left is about the size of Abraham Lincoln's nostril on a penny. This is “The Market for Superpremium Ice Cream.”

What is less clear is whether the Massachusetts citizenry will rise up against a latter-day judicial oligarchy — four members of the state's Supreme Judicial Court — that makes King George III look positively benign by comparison.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences.

It’s no coincidence that states where judges are elected are less likely to experience judicial activism of the sort Massachusetts must now work to undo * * * The requirement that judges go before the voters periodically provides a much-needed restraint on the activist impulses of what was once regarded as the “least dangerous” branch of government.

Whether state or federal, elected or appointed, judges perform a function fundamentally different from that of the people’s elected representatives. Legislative and executive officials act on behalf of the voters who placed them in office; “judge[s] represen[t] the Law.” Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380, 411 (1991) (Scalia, J., dissenting). Unlike their counterparts in the political branches, judges are expected to refrain from catering to particular constituencies or committing themselves on controversial issues in advance of adversarial presentation. Their mission is to decide “individual cases and controversies” on individual records, Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211, 266 (1995) (Stevens, J., dissenting), neutrally applying legal principles, and, when necessary, “stand[ing] up to what is generally supreme in a democracy: the popular will,” Scalia, The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules, 56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1175, 1180 (1989).

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

That inflexible and uniform adherence to the rights of the Constitution, and of individuals, which we perceive to be indispensable in the courts of justice, can certainly not be expected from judges who hold their offices by a temporary commission. Periodical appointments, however regulated, or by whomsoever made, would, in some way or other, be fatal to their necessary independence. If the power of making them was committed either to the Executive or legislature, there would be danger of an improper complaisance to the branch which possessed it; if to both, there would be an unwillingness to hazard the displeasure of either; if to the people, or to persons chosen by them for the special purpose, there would be too great a disposition to consult popularity, to justify a reliance that nothing would be consulted but the Constitution and the laws.

It's hard to say which Landis harmed more -- America's National Pastime, or its Common Decency * * * For two decades, this succubus sat on the federal bench, torturing the poor and defenseless. Anyone who displeased him was sentenced to jail. He even sentenced a U. S. Congressman, Victor Berger, to 20 years in Leavenworth for speaking in opposition to America's involvement in World War I. The Supreme Court overruled Landis on that one, but he was used to being overruled and later complained that "the laws of this country should have permitted me to have Berger lined up against the wall and shot." You can see why he appealed to baseball owners.

Virtually every hateful outrage in baseball history can be ascribed, in some measure, to Landis' INTEGRITY AND LEADERSHIP. It started around 1915, when competition from the upstart Federal League threatened to undo the notorious "reserve clause," which bound each player to his team like an indentured servant. The clause was laughably illegal, an obvious violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, but Landis took care of that. First, he arranged a backroom deal in which the Federals were paid off and the monopoly restored; then, in a breathtaking masterstroke, Landis almost certainly used his influence to obtain baseball's antitrust exemption from the Supreme Court. With competition gone and players stripped of all legal protection, he was soon able to suspend Babe Ruth for having the audacity to play ball in the offseason. All the sordid details can be found in a marvelous scholarly paper called "Larceny and Old Leather" by Prof. Eldon Ham of Chicago-Kent Law School. Ham also pronounces Landis "the game's chief racist," and notes that it is no coincidence that desegregation occurred only after Landis' death.

By far the most scandalous aspect of the Black Sox scandal was not the fix, but the legal proceedings that followed it. Three players confessed and eight were indicted, but before the case went to trial, the grand jury records, complete with confessions, went a-missin'. They turned up four years later in the possession of one George Hudnall, who just happened to be [White Sox owner] Charles Comiskey's lawyer. Apparently, someone, or several someones, had decided that a public trial would be bad for the baseball business. So the players were acquitted; but Landis, in a final insult to American justice, banned them from baseball for life, as he put it, "regardless of the verdict of juries."

NEW YORK, Jan. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Mitchell C. Shapiro, a member of Constantine & Partners, P.C. has resigned from the Firm effective January 2, 2004. Mitch was a founding member of Constantine & Partners in 1994 along with Eliot Spitzer, Bob Begleiter, Yang Chen, Jeff Shinder, Abby Milstein and Lloyd Constantine. Mitch played a major part in the Firm's role as lead counsel for U.S. Merchants in the landmark Visa Check/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation, which concluded last month with the District Court's final approval of a settlement of more than $3 billion in compensatory relief and a historic injunction.

In the wake of that victory, Mitch has decided to pursue new opportunities. The Firm wishes Mitch continued success and appreciates all his work for the Firm and its clients.

"We were misguided [in 1989]. We thought he would be contrite. It just wasn't in him. I wish he were more contrite even now. John Dowd [who headed baseball's investigation] is owed a big apology," said Vincent, adding that Rose even hurt those who tried to defend him. Vincent cites one well-known baseball author who "wrote five pages about how there was 'not a shred of evidence' in the Dowd report" and another "who excoriated us for running roughshod over Pete's rights. Where are those people today?"

The tenor of that process concerns me for a very different reason than the effect that it has on the judge. I worry about how it affects the public. There is ample evidence that the public has very little understanding of the court system, the judicial process generally, and even of the way that we decide cases. When candidates for the judiciary are so publicly questioned about their personal views on various controversial issues of our day, I feel that the public is increasingly convinced that judges base their decisions on their personal views rather than case law, statutes, and relevant facts. In my view, the confirmation process is an excellent example of one of the places where the public could be educated appropriately about the role of an independent judiciary, the true meaning of a government of laws and not of people, and some of the basic tenets upon which this nation was founded. Regrettably, when the public is only exposed to such rancorous questioning about personal viewpoints, it reinforces the cynicism about whether the judicial process is fair for all people. I fully recognize and applaud the constitutional role that the Senate has in the confirmation process. I only wish that all three branches of government would spend some time taking the high ground of educating the public about some of the basic first principles upon which this nation was founded. Regrettably, I think the confirmation process as it stands today is counterproductive in that respect.

I don't know what kind of man-hating channel I stumbled on to see this commercial, but I swear it exists. Guy and girl are on a "romantic" little rowboat ride on a lake. Rowboat springs a leak in the hull. Guy panics. While guy isn't looking, girl whips out tampon (yes, TAMPON!) and stuffs into hole, stopping the leak. Sweet music plays. What the f***? I mean, really what the f*** is that?

In and around town, many people were very skeptical about Steve Spurrier's return, except for one person. The paper's Redskins BEAT WRITER Mark Maske. Maske kept writing, and insisting on local TV shows, that he believed Spurrier would be back. Ooops. Now, speculation has always been, that Maske is the Redskins' "house man" at the Post, and will write basically press releases based on what Dan Snyder wants in the paper. I don't know this for a fact but I know one thing: if you are considered a "great journalistic newspaper" and the beat man for the only team in town that matters is the only guy who gets whipsawed by Spurrier leaving, does that embarrass anybody? I mean, if you were an editor at the Post, and wanted your man to "get the story" then how would you react after the guy who's been with the team for the last three years ends up entirely wrong about the biggest story of the year?

The book's naive economics is even worse than its folk psychology. Easterbrook treats the economy as an automated machine aimed at "the manufacture and distribution of the maximum volume of goods and services."

In fact, the market is a complex feedback system that maximizes not volume but value, which is as likely to be intangible as physical. But intangible value, at least other people's intangible value, is greedy waste to Easterbrook.

Middle-class people, for instance, are snapping up Maytag's aesthetically appealing Duet washer-dryer, which costs $2,200, instead of buying an equally functional set for $1,000. The extra $1,200 is just "money-burning" and would be better spent on charity.

But consider this: A Duet will last at least 10 years, so the additional $1,200 amounts to $2.30 a week. That's less than half what Easterbrook spends on perishable flowers. Whose aesthetic pleasure is "money-burning"? Easterbrook is understandably sympathetic to the hardships faced by poor people amid plenty. But his solution to poverty is to wave a magic policy wand.

Every American and legal immigrant should have health insurance, he says. What system should we adopt? He doesn't tell us, nor does he address the myriad feedback effects and distortions that any such system entails. Is everyone entitled to knee-replacement surgery?

We should raise the minimum wage to "at least $10 an hour," he says. Doubling the minimum wage would make the "prosperous majority" happier, because they "could enjoy their positions with a clearer conscience."

The Fiscal Year 2004 budget process has been a difficult one, and the Judiciary's appropriation for the fiscal year that began on October 1 will not be enacted until sometime in January, 2004, at the earliest. The delay in enacting an appropriations bill has disrupted the Judiciary and forced it to operate at inadequate levels of funding under continuing resolutions.

We appreciate that, for Fiscal Year 2004, the omnibus appropriations bill currently pending includes $222 million for new courthouse construction and $248 million to repair existing courthouses. The Judiciary's funding for Fiscal Year 2004 included in the omnibus appropriations bill, however, is inadequate.

The continuing uncertainties and delays in the funding process have necessitated substantial effort on the part of judges and judiciary managers and staff to modify budget systems, develop contingency plans, cancel activities, and attempt to cut costs. Many courts may face hiring freezes, furloughs, or reductions in force. I hope that the Congress will soon pass a Fiscal Year 2004 appropriation for the Judiciary, and that in future years the Judiciary's budget is enacted prior to the beginning of the fiscal year.

Online retailers are reporting a run on ephedra products as consumers make last-minute purchases of the dietary supplement that the federal government plans to ban.

The Food and Drug Administration announced Tuesday that it will ban ephedra in March. The agency urged consumers to stop taking the herbal ingredient, which has been linked to 155 deaths in the United States.

* * *

A sales representative at Dps Nutrition Inc., a Taylor, Pa., online supplement store, said ephedra products such as Extreme Ripped Force, ECA Stack and Diet Fuel have been dominating sales this week.

"We're seeing a record number of sales for ephedra products," the sales representative said, refusing to disclose her name.

Bodybuilding.com, a Boise, Idaho, online supplement retailer, posted about 2,000 orders for ephedra products on Tuesday, the Los Angeles Times reported. That one-day sale doubled the company's previous record.

Metabolife's original 356 formula, a weight-loss supplement with ephedra, was selling on EBay yesterday for $60 to $100 per 104-capsule bottle. Its ephedra-free counterpart was selling for $5 to $16 per 90-capsule bottle.

Micron Technology, as part of an agreement to win amnesty from prosecution by the Justice Department, may admit it conspired with competitors to manipulate computer-chip prices, people familiar with the probe said.

Boise, Idaho-based Micron, the world's No. 2 maker of memory chips, is in talks to provide information to bolster a possible U.S. case against three other companies in the $16 billion market for dynamic random access memory, or DRAM, chips, the people said.

The U.S. is probing whether Micron conspired with Infineon Technologies, Samsung Electronics and Hynix Semiconductor.

Cooperating with the agency could allow Micron executives to avoid prosecution.

The 17-year-old junior says that stance inspired threats from which teachers have refused to protect him. Some faculty members even started a public campaign against his group. . . In a telephone interview, Tim said he's been threatened at least three times . . . . One boy said he was going to "find someone" to beat up Tim. In two of those instances, Tim said two faculty members stood by and did nothing to help him.