Barcelona violent clashes rage on

Police in Barcelona have clashed with gangs of hooded youths over three nights of violence on the streets of the city. Rioting began last Monday following the eviction of squatters from an unofficial community centre in the north-eastern city.

‘Can Vies’, an abandoned building owned by the city’s transport authority, has been occupied by squatters and left-wing activists since 1997.

Following the eviction youths in the city took to the streets to protest, with the demonstrations soon turning to violence.

By Tuesday night the dissent had spread out to other parts of the city.

Angry young people set fires to bins, broke windows and pelted police with rocks. They also set fire to equipment used to demolish the squat.

Reportedly, banks in the city have also been targeted following the eviction, which has triggered widespread dissatisfaction.

Some 30 people have been arrested over the clashes so far.

Another demonstration has been called for tomorrow (Saturday) morning with the intention of rebuilding Can Vies, which has not yet been entirely demolished.

The chief of the Catalan police force resigned on the morning after the riots began, drawing huge criticism from politicians and the city’s mayor.

Related Stories:

Barcelona protesters clash with police

The secret eyes watching you

Businesses are gathering mountains of data on how you shop, what you buy and where you live

• FTC chairwoman Edith Ramirez warns consumers about invisible data brokers


• Transactions quietly surrender a gold mine of data, from where you live to what you like


• FTC wants Congress to improve the transparency of data broker industry


• It also wants brokers to create central website so consumers can see their own data, opt out

Editor's note: Edith Ramirez is chairwoman of the Federal Trade Commission. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- Who doesn't like getting those retail discounts or free gift coupons from their favorite stores?

But did you know there were strings attached, invisible eyes tracking your every consumer move? And there's little you can do to stop it.

We want to do something about that.

Businesses have long sought to attract and retain customers by recording and analyzing your shopping and lifestyle habits. To do so, they often rely on "data brokers" -- companies that collect and share our personal information and label us based on what they learn. And they do this mostly without our knowledge.

That fashionable handbag you found on sale? They know about it. That great deal you got on the BBQ grill from the hardware store? They're tracking that too. And that box of Cheerios? They already assumed you were going to buy that before you even entered the store.

The data broker industry has been booming in recent years, due to new technologies that enable the collection of massive quantities of our personal information. Because of the sheer volume of data we leave in our wake when we shop, browse the web, order a magazine, or post to social media sites, we are largely giving them all this valuable information.

Data brokers scoop up the digital breadcrumbs we leave as we shop in stores and online, and apply "big data" analytical tools to predict where we're going, what we'll buy, and what we'll do -- sometimes even before we know ourselves what we'll buy next.

There's no question that the personal information that data brokers sell to retailers, financial firms, hotels, airlines and other businesses can provide benefits to consumers and our growing digital economy. It can help direct goods and services that are tailored to our interests and assisting businesses to combat fraud by verifying consumers' identities.

They also take this information and use it to lump us into various, shorthand categories like "Affluent Baby Boomer" and "Bible Lifestyle."

But if a data broker categorizes you as an "Urban Scrambler," meaning a low-income minority, are you more likely to receive an offer for a payday loan than a credit card?

Target and Neiman Marcus hacks

Gov't. cracks down on weight-loss scams

Stopping the patent trolls

What are the implications of being labeled as "financially challenged?" Will it mean you are cut off from being offered the same goods and services, at the same prices, as your neighbors?

Do you want a company to know that you have diabetes, high cholesterol, or another medical condition as long as it is willing to pay the going rate for health data?

Most Americans don't even know that data brokers exist, let alone that they collect and trade a staggering amount of our personal data. Brokers operate invisibly, buying and selling data about us without interacting directly with us. Too few offer easy ways for us to access our information or opt-out of their system of data collection.

The Federal Trade Commission, a bipartisan agency that works to protect consumers, is seeking to shed light on this largely unknown industry. The FTC has just released a detailed study of nine data brokers.

We found that data brokers collect billions of pieces of data on nearly every American consumer, often merging online and offline information. Data brokers are also making potentially sensitive inferences about consumers -- about their health, financial status, and ethnic backgrounds. And consumers have little if any window into this process, let alone meaningful control or choice about how their data is shared among businesses.

This week, the FTC has called on Congress to improve the transparency of the data broker industry, and to provide consumers more control over their personal information. We also recommend that Congress require data brokers to create a centralized website, among other measures, so that consumers can access their own data and opt out of data collection and retention.

I also believe data brokers should be required to take reasonable steps to ensure consumer information is not used for unlawful purposes, such as to illegally discriminate.

We need better transparency into how data brokers collect and use our personal information to help ensure that we not go down a path that leads to unfair exclusion, but rather one that widens opportunities for all consumers.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on http://ift.tt/1bl3g0P.

Faith unshaken by death sentence

• Meriam Yehya Ibrahim has been condemned to die by hanging


• A Sudanese court issued the sentence after she refused to renounce her Christian faith


• Her husband says she's holding firm to her beliefs regardless of circumstances


• She gave birth to a baby girl this week at a Sudanese prison

Khartoum, Sudan (CNN) -- A Sudanese woman sentenced to death for refusing to renounce her Christian faith is unlikely to change her mind, her husband says.

Meriam Yehya Ibrahim was condemned to die by hanging after she declined to profess she is a Muslim, the religion of her father. Sharia law considers her a Muslim and does not recognize her marriage to a Christian

The court convicted Ibrahim of apostasy, or the renunciation of faith, and adultery two weeks ago. At the time, she was eight months' pregnant. She gave birth to a baby girl this week at a Khartoum prison, where she's detained with Martin, her 20-month-old son.

Despite languishing in prison with two infants, she's holding firm to her beliefs, according to her husband, Daniel Wani, an American citizen who is also a Christian.

"There is pressure on her from Muslim religious leaders that she should return to the faith," Wani told CNN in a TV exclusive. "She said, 'How can I return when I never was a Muslim? Yes, my father was a Muslim, but I was brought up by my mother.' "

Christian sentenced to death

Will Sudan execute jailed young mother?

Husband: All I can do is pray

Wani said his wife is a practicing Christian, more so than him, and even had their son baptized.

"I know my wife. She's committed," he said. "Even last week, they brought in sheikhs and she told them, 'I'm pretty sure I'm not going to change my mind.' "

Wani said he is thrilled about his new daughter but hopes her birth doesn't hasten his wife's death sentence.

In past cases involving pregnant or nursing women, Sudan waited until the mother had weaned her child before executing any sentence. Sharia law as practiced in Sudan prohibits carrying out the death sentence on an expectant woman until two years after she gives birth.

CNN has sought comment from the Sudanese government and was directed to the Justice Ministry. Subsequently, a CNN request for an interview was denied, and CNN was told the justice minister does not comment on matters before the court as a final judgment has not yet been issued in this case. An attempt to contact Sudan's foreign affairs minister for comment was unsuccessful.

Woman raised as Christian, husband says

Ibrahim, 27, was arrested after Muslim relatives accused her of renouncing her religion.

Their complaint alleged that she went missing for years, and her family was shocked to find out she married a Christian, according to her attorney, Mohamed Jar Elnabi.

Wani said he'd never met the relatives who made the accusations. His wife, he said, was raised a Christian by her mother, an Ethiopian Orthodox, after her Muslim father deserted the family when Ibrahim was 6.

"These people filed charges claiming that she was their sister and filed a police report saying that she had disappeared," he said.

At first, Ibrahim was charged with adultery for marrying a Christian. The apostasy accusation was added after she maintained she was a Christian, according to her husband.

"The police originally called for the case to be dismissed, but these people went back and added another charge ... which is adultery, by saying she was their sister and a Muslim. It is illegal for a Muslim woman to marry a Christian man, therefore we were brought before the court."

She's been detained since January 17, he said. In addition to the emotional turmoil resulting from the conviction, the couple also have to worry about their children, Wani said.

"An illegitimate marriage does not result in legally recognized offspring, which means that my son and the new baby are no longer mine," he said.

Wani's physical condition makes the ordeal even harder. He uses a wheelchair and "totally depends" on Ibrahim, according to her lawyer.

"He cannot live without her," he said.

Wani said he's not been allowed to visit his detained family as much since the apostasy charge was added.

"She's in a bad mood," he said of his wife. "She's frustrated."

More punishment

In addition to the death sentence, the court sentenced Ibrahim to 100 lashes for the adultery conviction.

To avoid this fate, all she had to do was recant her Christian faith.

The court had warned her to renounce her Christianity by May 15, but she has steadfastly maintained she is a Christian and will remain so.

Sudanese Parliament speaker Fatih Izz Al-Deen said claims that she was raised as a non-Muslim were untrue.

She was raised in an Islamic environment, and her brother, a Muslim, filed the complaint against her, according to Al-Deen.

'I'll stand by her'

Wani said he was optimistic the appeal their lawyers have filed would lead to the court's ruling being overturned.

"I'm hoping that, given the way people have come together around the world -- which I want to thank them for," he said.

"All the rights groups, all the broadcasters ... It's looking like it had an effect. Perhaps it will result in the judgment being overturned."

But until it's done, the mother of his children has his support.

"I'm standing by her to end. Whatever she wants, I'll stand by her," he said.

Worldwide condemnation

Rights groups and foreign embassies worldwide have condemned the verdict. The ruling also created shock waves in Sudan, where activists are defying the government and criticizing what they consider an overly harsh implementation and interpretation of Islam

"The fact that a woman could be sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion, is abhorrent and should never be even considered," said Manar Idriss, Amnesty International's Sudan researcher.

Foreign embassies in Khartoum, including those of the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, urged the Sudanese government to reverse course.

There's no timetable on when the judicial process will be over, but the couple isn't giving up. The appeals court's ruling could come within the next week, their attorney says.

Until then, they're grasping at small signs of hope. The last time Sudan executed someone for apostasy was in 1985 when a man criticized the implementation of Sharia law.

Read: Sudanese woman sentenced to death for her Christianity gives birth in prison

Read: Opinion: Why marrying for love should never mean death

CNN's Nima Elbagir reported from Khartoum, and Faith Karimi reported and wrote from Atlanta. CNN's Greg Botelho contributed to this report.

Woman gives birth in prison

• Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, 27, gave birth in prison


• Sources: Her husband was not allowed to attend the birth


• Ibrahim was convicted of apostasy

(CNN) -- A Sudanese woman sentenced to die for refusing to renounce her Christianity gave birth to a baby girl in prison Tuesday, her lawyers said.

Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, 27, delivered her baby at a women's prison in Khartoum, but her husband was not allowed to be present for the birth, sources told CNN. They asked not to be named for safety reasons.

Supermodel puts spotlight on South Sudan

Could newest country become bloodiest?

Attacks on Nigerian Christians

Ibrahim was convicted of apostasy, or the renunciation of faith, about two weeks ago while she was eight months pregnant.

A Sudanese lawyer filed an appeal last week to reverse the verdict by the lower court.

She is in prison with her 20-month-old son, but Sudanese officials have said the toddler is free to leave any time, according to her lawyer, Mohamed Jar Elnabi.

Her husband, Daniel Wani, is a U.S. citizen who uses a wheelchair and "totally depends on her for all details of his life," her lawyer said.

The appeal

The appeals court in Khartoum will issue a ruling on the case in the next week, but it will first ask the lower court to submit the documents it used to make the ruling, according to her lawyer.

Once that's done, it will issue a case number, he said.

"We will continue checking with the appeals court, but Inshallah (Allah willing) ... the appeals court will reverse the sentence and set her free," he said.

Christian or Muslim?

Ibrahim says her father was a Sudanese Muslim and her mother was Ethiopian Orthodox. Her father left when she was 6, and she was raised as a Christian.

The court had warned her to renounce her Christianity by May 15, but she held firm to her beliefs.

Sudanese Parliament speaker Fatih Izz Al-Deen said claims that Ibrahim was raised as non-Muslim are untrue.

She was raised in an Islamic environment, and her brother, a Muslim, filed the complaint against her, according to Al-Deen.

The complaint alleges that she went missing for several years, and her family was shocked to find out she married a Christian, according to her lawyer.

However, because her father was Muslim, the courts considered her one too, which would mean her marriage to a non-Muslim man is void.

Attempts to contact Sudan's justice minister and foreign affairs minister for comment were unsuccessful.

South Sudan on edge

Hundreds killed in South Sudan massacre

Daniel Wani and his son Martin.

100 lashes

In addition to the death sentence, the court convicted Ibrahim of adultery and sentenced her to 100 lashes.

The Parliament speaker has said the verdict is not final and will go through all the judicial stages to reach the constitutional court.

Worldwide condemnation

Rights groups and foreign embassies worldwide condemned the verdict.

"The fact that a woman could be sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion, is abhorrent and should never be even considered," said Manar Idriss, Amnesty International's Sudan researcher.

Katherine Perks with the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies said the verdict goes against Sudan's "own constitution and commitments made under regional and international law."

Foreign embassies in Khartoum, including those of the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, urged the government to reverse course.

In past cases involving pregnant or nursing women, the Sudanese government waited until the mother weaned her child before executing any sentence, said Christian Solidarity Worldwide spokeswoman Kiri Kankhwende.

Opinion: Why marrying for love should never mean death

Gergen: What it takes to fix the VA

• David Gergen: An admirable Shinseki performed selfless act of service be resigning VA post


• VA needs world-class leader with support team of ex-servicemen and women, he says


• Gergen: It's a narrow field of qualified. Ashton Carter. retired General John Allen would be good


• Gergen Most crucial is recruiting top-flight veterans who can help imaginatively pull VA into shape

Editor's note: David Gergen is a senior political analyst for CNN and has been an adviser to four presidents. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he is a professor of public service and director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Follow him on Twitter at @david_gergen. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- General Eric Shinseki, one of the finest soldiers of his generation, performed a final act of service for his country when he fell on his sword. It was a sad moment but, as a life-long patriot, he knew he had to resign as secretary of Veterans Affairs.

As good an officer as he was, he could no longer expect to lead his huge department, a bureaucracy second in size only to Defense and representing nearly 15% of the entire federal civilian work force. Evidence has been piling up that he and his top lieutenants knew shockingly little about misdeeds within the department, despite years of negative reports. And he was rapidly losing the confidence of Congress, the public and most importantly, veterans.

Now, attention can rightly expand from investigations of the past -- though they must go on -- to how to fix the future. A White House that has hardly covered itself with glory needs to get on top of the problem and stay aggressively there.

The place to start is to appoint a world-class leader to run the place and recruit a squad of young, talented veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as a personal support team.

Unfortunately, the best person in the country to run the VA is the least available: Robert Gates. No one knows more or as has been more effective in running large, massive public institutions than Gates. He was not only superb at running the CIA but was then successful in running Texas A&M (the seventh-largest university in the country) and went on to serve with great distinction as secretary of defense, winding down two wars for Presidents Bush and Obama.

Borger: Obama defeated by bureaucracy?

But Gates is now happy in retirement in Washington state, thousands of miles away from Washington, D.C. If you have seen him on a book tour, you may have noticed the neck brace he had to wear for a few months. He jokes that one morning over breakfast he told his wife he was thinking of returning to D.C. and the next thing he knew, he woke up in the hospital with a broken neck.

The point is that the VA desperately needs a leader who can overhaul an agency notoriously resistant to change, someone who knows a lot about military culture. After Gates, the next best choice is likely to be his last deputy at DOD, Ashton Carter. (Disclosure: Carter is a friend and esteemed colleague from the Kennedy School.) Carter won very high marks among civilians and military as deputy secretary, the person who "runs the building."

Sanders responds to Shinseki resignation

Is this the next VA Secretary?

Sen. Blumenthal: VA employees lied

The White House may also find a retired four-star general who would be a good fit; retired Gen. John Allen, whom the President tapped to help out with negotiations in the Middle East, quickly comes to mind. But the roster of people who would be strong choices is actually quite limited, so the search must be relentlessly tough-minded.

Even so, this is not a one-person job. A new secretary will need reinforcements. There are none better than some of the veterans who have come back from Iraq and Afghanistan, peeled off their uniforms, and volunteered to continue their service as civilians -- rightful heirs of the World War II generation.

A smart White House would recruit some of the best among them and put them to work fixing the VA in some imaginative way -- possibly in full-time stints, possibly in consulting teams. An obvious candidate as leader: Lt. Cmdr. Eric Greitens, a Rhodes Scholar, Navy SEAL, veteran of several tours, best-selling author, founder of the veterans group, The Mission Continues (I serve on its board).

In recent years, I have had the privilege of teaching a number of veterans who have pursued graduate degrees at Harvard. They are extraordinarily talented and ready to help. Start with Maura Sullivan, for example: Northwestern undergrad, Marine officer in Iraq, graduate of the Harvard Business School and Kennedy School, now rising in leadership ranks at PepsiCo and serving on a federal veterans advisory board.

Top talent is ready and willing. Why not ask them for help? Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have had too little voice in the VA. It's time to call on the best to serve their country again.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter .

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion .

How terrible is it to be born a girl?

• A woman in Pakistan was stoned to death, nearly 300 girls in Nigeria were kidnapped


• Isobel Coleman: Despite progress, all societies suffer from violence against women


• She says but these headlines of hatred against women are starting to catalyze change


• Coleman: That violence is being counted is a step forward from centuries of silence

Editor's note: Isobel Coleman is the author of "Paradise Beneath Her Feet" and a senior fellow of U.S. foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- How terrible is it to be born a girl in the world today? The almost daily headlines about another cruel act of violence and discrimination against women -- from the kidnapping of nearly 300 school girls in Nigeria last month, to the latest gruesome stoning of a woman in Pakistan -- provide plenty of reasons to be pessimistic about women's equality and safety in today's world.

The recent case of "misogynist extremism" in California, where a young man killed six people in "retribution" for all the girls who had rejected him, underscores the fact that all societies suffer from violence against women.

Indeed, the World Health Organization estimates that 35% of women worldwide experience intimate-partner violence or non-partner sexual violence in their lifetime. A new World Bank report estimates that in some countries, the economic toll of violence against women exceeds a staggering 3% of GDP.

Also shocking in the 21st century is that the leading cause of death worldwide for girls ages 15 to 19 is complication related to pregnancy and childbirth, in many cases because girls are married and bearing children before their young bodies are ready. High rates of child marriage in some countries also limit the educational opportunities and economic independence of girls. Add in a persistent preference for sons in South, East and Central Asia that has resulted in millions of "missing girls," and the picture for girls today seems pretty grim.

But these challenges, as daunting as they are, should not obscure the important gains that women and girls have made in recent decades -- gains that point to a much brighter future.

First, the global gender gap in education has been shrinking: Between 1999 and 2009, the number of girls out of school dropped from nearly 61 million to 35 million, and equal numbers of girls and boys now complete primary school in Latin America and East Asia. In fact, around the world, women are beginning to outnumber men at the university level -- in some cases by a wide margin.

Women's political participation worldwide also continues to grow. As of July 2013, 35 countries, including nine in Africa, had national parliaments with at least 30% female representatives and several countries now include quotas to ensure women's political participation. Examples of women rising to the top of their fields -- just think of Hillary Clinton, Janet Yellen, Angela Merkel, Sheryl Sandberg and others -- and on their own terms, are increasingly more common.

The dire statistics we hear today about violence against women have a silver lining -- that violence is being counted -- and quantified -- which is a huge leap forward from centuries of silence and acceptance of the oppression of women.

Official: Nigerian kidnapped girls located

Arrests in rape, hanging of two girls

Honor crimes and sexual violence have long gone unrecorded because such behavior is tolerated, ignored, or conveniently covered up in mostly rural communities. Survivors often remain silent for fear their attackers will take revenge if they report the crime. But national and international media coverage and popular outrage are beginning to shift the dynamic. The proliferation of mobile phones and use of social media mean that violence and discrimination against women are increasingly reported.

In the aftermath of the 2012 gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old female student in New Delhi, India, journalists called me asking why are we seeing such an uptick in sexual violence against women now -- is it somehow related to globalization? My response is that we simply have no data to conclude that the incidence of sexual violence in India is actually increasing -- reported incidents may be on the rise, but that could be because women, supported by male family members, are finally breaking the code of silence to denounce and prosecute their attackers.

The outrage in the New Delhi case forced the Indian government to strengthen its sexual assault laws -- including making rape in some cases punishable by life in prison or the death penalty and increasing the minimum sentence for gang rape to 20 years.

As depressing and disturbing as the headlines can be, news of violence, hatred, and discrimination against women is beginning to catalyze powerful change. So too is the growing body of evidence that disempowering women poses an enormous economic cost on society.

There will inevitably be backlash against that change -- backlash that will take the form of deranged extremists from California to Nigeria to Pakistan -- but the momentum of positive change for women and girls in the world today is undeniable.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion .

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion .

A remedy for Amazon-Hachette fight?

• Amazon made it much harder for consumers to purchase books by publisher Hachette


• Lina Khan: Government could play a role in bringing contract dispute to an end


• Books by J.K. Rowling and Malcolm Gladwell are among those affected


• Khan: Government has largely stopped enforcing a key antitrust law

Editor's note: Lina Khan is a policy analyst at the New America Foundation, where she researches and reports on the effects of concentrated economic power. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- Amazon only this week acknowledged the storm it raised earlier this month when it made it much harder for consumers to buy books by Hachette, a major French publisher, in order to extract better contract terms.

The spat has affected titles by authors ranging from Malcolm Gladwell to J.K. Rowling to J.D. Salinger, whose books Amazon has suddenly made unavailable or more expensive, or which the online retailer says will take many weeks to ship. In its first public statement recognizing the dispute, Amazon notes the standoff is unlikely to end any time soon.

This fight is part of a long drawn-out battle between publishers and Amazon, which has used its immense control over the book market (by some estimates it sells up to 50% of print and electronic books in the U.S.) to reshape the industry.

Understandably, authors, publishers, and others from the literary world reacted to Amazon's latest play with alarm, cautioning that its brute exercise of power threatens not only the economic underpinnings of their industry, but also the very quality of books and diversity of ideas.

Amazon, meanwhile, has tried to defuse the frenzy of attention, explaining that its tactics are just a routine part of how retailers negotiate with suppliers. Many journalists, too, have echoed Amazon's point: Sure, it might seem unfair for Amazon to use its clout this way, but isn't it just how it goes? And if it means Amazon charges us less for books, aren't we better off?

They're important questions -- ones that get to the heart of a decades-old law that, if still enforced by government, would likely go some way in taming this fight, and drastically curb Amazon's power over the book industry in general.

Called the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936, the law prohibits a retailer from wielding its mere size to bully suppliers for discounts.

Congress passed the law as the rise of A&P -- America's first modern mega-chain store -- was shuttering independent businesses. Also known as the "Anti-Price Discrimination Act," the law basically limits the clout won from size, establishing that a retailer can't simply secure better terms because it is bigger and therefore has more bargaining power. (The law also applies to suppliers, prohibiting them from discriminating against small retailers in favor of big ones.)

Preventing large chain stores from muscling exclusive discounts from suppliers based on size and not service or cost-justifications, the idea went, would give smaller entities a fair chance at competing. It didn't matter if retailers passed on these savings to consumers or not. It was fair competition that mattered.

Through the 1970s, antitrust agencies enforced the act pretty vigorously; in the 1960s alone the government brought 518 Robinson-Patman cases.

Enforcement began to drop under President Carter, and the Reagan administration -- which ushered in a fundamental shift in antitrust policy more generally -- scaled back enforcement even further. Successive administrations have largely followed suit: The Clinton administration brought just one case between 1993 and 2000, and neither the Justice Department nor the Federal Trade Commission has wielded the law since.

Federal courts, too, have made it much harder to win a price discrimination suit. But the law is still on the books, and is important to recall because it enshrines a key tenet: That preserving fair competition requires that we curb the bullying power of size.

So it is true that retailers and suppliers have a right to negotiate however they please. But the relative bargaining power between the two parties is an important factor when considering what is anti-competitive. Several journalists have compared Amazon's actions to those of Wal-Mart, which famously uses its market dominance to squeeze suppliers -- a strategy it has applied forcibly enough to transform entire industries. What this analogy misses, though, is that even Wal-Mart's license to use its heft this way is relatively new.

"If the government still enforced Robinson-Patman, it would go a fair way towards limiting the power of Amazon," said Oren Teicher, CEO of the American Booksellers Association, which represents independent bookstores. He would know: In the 1990s, ABA brought numerous cases against both publishers and chain stores for violating Robinson-Patman.

Somewhat perversely, until now, the closest encounter Amazon has had with antitrust authorities was when it successfully prodded them to bring a case against five major publishers and Apple. That fight, too, centered on the price of e-books.

In order to wrest control back from Amazon -- which had been pricing digital bestsellers and new titles at a flat $9.99, a fraction of the price of physical copies and sometimes even lower than wholesale -- publishers had adopted a new pricing arrangement, known as the "agency model."

After getting Apple on board, publishers extended the model to all booksellers -- including Amazon. After losing the ability to undercut its competitors, its share of the market fell from 90% to around 65%.

Amazon responded by filing a complaint with the FTC, and in 2012 the Justice Department sued Apple and the publishers for collusion. As part of their settlement, publishers temporarily lost the right to the agency model, handing back to Amazon the power to slash prices.

In the years since, its share of the e-book market has, predictably, risen again, positioning it to leverage that market power against Hachette. It's worth remembering that its tactic -- holding the publisher hostage unless it concedes to better terms -- flouts the principles of anti-price discrimination laws. Accepting Amazon's argument that the nature of its fight with the publisher is innate to how markets work ignores a key piece of American history.

Report: Amazon adding music streaming to Prime

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on http://ift.tt/1bl3g0P.

Don't blame Shinseki

The Department of Veterans Affairs has been criticized over its treatment of veterans in need of health care.

• Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers says the dysfunction in the VA is unacceptable and inexcusable


• She tells the story of two brothers who failed to get adequate treatment after service


• Nearly 30% of veterans return from war with some kind of service-related disability


• She supports a bill to allow veterans to seek outside care from private practitioners

Editor's note: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Washington, is chairwoman of the House Republican Conference and represents her state's 5th District. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- This is a story about two brothers.

They grew up in eastern Washington, joined the Marines and fought in Iraq and Afghanistan after the terrorist attacks of September 11.

The brothers served valiantly, in the name of American freedom, to defend liberty and democracy abroad. They saw battle and bloodshed, bore witness to the loss of life and faced the unforgettable and haunting realities of war.

The brothers returned to America emotionally shattered, psychologically distraught and forever changed. And the Department of Veterans Affairs failed to treat them.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers

Years later, like many of their comrades, these brothers, whose names we are keeping private, suffer from severe post-traumatic stress, anxiety, depression, physical disabilities and memory loss.

One lives with severe head injuries because of the bombs that went off beside him in Fallujah. The other was afraid to admit his suicidal thoughts. And when he finally did, the VA locked him in a room for several torturous hours until they ultimately let him go -- without any treatment or assistance whatsoever. He was left alone to replay and relive the horrors of war.

This is unacceptable and inexcusable. As the wife of a retired Navy commander and the representative of the district covering Fairchild Air Force Base in Spokane, Washington, I see firsthand the permanent effects of war -- both physical and psychological -- on those who serve our country.

Nearly 30% of today's veterans return from war with some kind of service-related disability -- often PTSD or traumatic brain injury -- and too often, the VA fails them.

Though recent reports highlight the fundamental inefficiencies and mismanagement within the agency, the VA has failed to protect America's veterans for far too long. This is a serious problem, and it demands a serious solution.

Document: VA audit report released

This issue is about more than the resignation of Secretary Eric Shinseki; it's about changing the structure and culture that have pervaded the VA for decades. The secretary is not the root of the problem; he's simply the face of it. We need to modernize an outdated agency, bring it into the 21st century and ensure that the VA is better equipped to treat the health and psychological issues that are unique to our veterans.

Shinseki apologizes, orders VA fixes

House Committee grills VA witnesses

Is firing Secy. Shinseki the answer?

Montel Williams: Protect our veterans

Moreover, the culture of the VA needs to change: Right now, too many veterans feel as if the VA treats them like a burden, leaving them both alone and untreated in the aftermath of war. We need to address the systemic, structural issues within the VA -- the misallocation of resources, the interminably long waiting lists, the bureaucratic inefficiencies -- to ensure that our American heroes are properly protected the second they return home from war.

The House has taken swift action to do just that. Last week, we passed the overwhelmingly bipartisan Department of Veterans Affairs Management Accountability Act of 2014, which holds the VA accountable for actions that are both egregious and preventable.

We urge the Senate to take immediate action on this legislation so we can get it to the president's desk and signed into law. We cannot afford to waste more time. With 23 deaths already attributed to delayed care -- and many more in which "delay in treatment" has been listed as a factor -- we refuse to let another veteran lose his or her life for something that can be prevented.

When one joins the military, he or she is promised health care for life. So we need to make sure that happens.

I am proud to join Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Jeff Miller, R-Florida, in his legislation to allow veterans to seek outside care from private practitioners, paid for by the department, if they have been waiting more than 30 days for an appointment. Our veterans should be allowed to go to local doctors and hospitals to treat their physical conditions and rely on the VA for issues that are unique to their specific needs.

It's time to bring the VA into the 21st century with stricter management, greater accountability and better care. While the agency has done great things -- such as its innovative work with prosthetics for disabled veterans or its telehealth system in regions like Spokane -- we need to take a closer look at the VA's infrastructure, its strategic plan and its allocation of resources. The agency needs greater accountability and transparency. But most of all, the VA needs to shift its priorities so the veteran is always the priority.

We will keep fighting. We will fight to give veterans the care they deserve and were promised. We will fight to modernize the VA to meet the needs of today's service members. And we will fight for those two brothers in eastern Washington and for the millions of heroes just like them who have served America with unwavering resolve.

They have protected us, and now we will protect them.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on http://ift.tt/1bl3g0P.