Boiled down, this is best summarized by five key points: transparency, choice, deregulation, trustbusting, and research.
They can do that by adopting a trustbusting mindset, pushing the federal education apparatus to reverse decades of bureaucratization.
But Roosevelt's trustbusting had fizzled, and Taft made up in sheer stubbornness what he lacked in flamboyance and discretion.
When Taft's critics blamed him for the recession and stock market slump of 1911-1912, he bluntly admitted that his policies might "make business halt." In private correspondence, he even recognized the danger trustbusting posed to his reelection: "We are going to enforce the law or die in the attempt." Roosevelt saw his opening and entered the 1912 race under the Bull Moose banner and as champion of the idea that there were in fact some good trusts.
By the 1920s, antitrust had become only one of several economic policies, and the passion for trustbusting was no longer red hot.
So, given the past, a vow such as James Rill's to conduct a "strong antitrust enforcement program"(32) raises two issues: the merits of the cases themselves, and what those cases imply about the possibility of a return to old-time trustbusting. The virtue of "nonenforcement rhetoric" and bid-rigging cases against road builders under Reagan was that those measures were unlikely to signal a return to widespread divestiture and other unpredictable antitrust adventure.