Today’s Washington Post offers a thoroughly sensible editorial on why the current city administration in Washington, DC., would be wrong to require (as it seems to be threatening to do) Wal-Mart to build a store in location X in order for the city to give that retailer permission to build in locations A, B, C, & D. But I was baffled by this passage in the editorial:
There’s no question that a fair amount of horse-trading goes on when companies enter — or are courted by — a market. But threatening to interfere with a governmental process is nothing more than a shakedown.
More-accurate wording would be:
There’s no question that a fair amount of horse-trading goes on when companies wishing to set up shop seek the permission of — or are courted by — a government. But threatening to interfere with a market process is nothing more than a shakedown.
