WEBVTT - The Opioid Epidemic and the Courts

0:00:15.356 --> 0:00:22.196
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin from Pushkin Industries. This is Deep Background, the show

0:00:22.236 --> 0:00:25.236
<v Speaker 1>where we explore the stories behind the stories in the news.

0:00:25.636 --> 0:00:31.836
<v Speaker 1>I'm Noah Feldman. In twenty seventeen, more than seventy thousand

0:00:31.876 --> 0:00:35.596
<v Speaker 1>people in the United States died of drug overdoses. Two

0:00:35.676 --> 0:00:39.916
<v Speaker 1>thirds of those deaths were linked to opioids. This opioid

0:00:39.916 --> 0:00:43.676
<v Speaker 1>epidemic has cost the United States two point five trillion

0:00:43.716 --> 0:00:47.436
<v Speaker 1>dollars between twenty fifteen and twenty eighteen, according to an

0:00:47.516 --> 0:00:51.516
<v Speaker 1>estimate recently released by the White House Council of Economic Advisors.

0:00:52.356 --> 0:00:55.596
<v Speaker 1>Now we're addressing this crisis by trying to hold the

0:00:55.636 --> 0:01:00.236
<v Speaker 1>company is responsible to account with the help of the law.

0:01:00.996 --> 0:01:04.316
<v Speaker 1>In order to begin to understand how it's going, it's

0:01:04.316 --> 0:01:08.196
<v Speaker 1>worth looking back to the Tobacco litigation, which is the

0:01:08.316 --> 0:01:11.676
<v Speaker 1>last time that the United States tried to address a

0:01:11.756 --> 0:01:18.436
<v Speaker 1>major public health crisis via lawsuits and litigation. That litigation

0:01:18.516 --> 0:01:21.716
<v Speaker 1>took place mostly in the nineteen nineties, and the way

0:01:21.756 --> 0:01:25.556
<v Speaker 1>it happened is that in almost every state, the attorney

0:01:25.676 --> 0:01:29.596
<v Speaker 1>general of the state, a government official, filed a lawsuit

0:01:29.916 --> 0:01:34.756
<v Speaker 1>on behalf of the state against the major tobacco producing

0:01:35.036 --> 0:01:39.636
<v Speaker 1>companies like Philip Morris and R. J. Reynolds. Then what

0:01:39.756 --> 0:01:43.596
<v Speaker 1>happened is that all of those lawsuits, forty six in total,

0:01:43.916 --> 0:01:48.196
<v Speaker 1>were brought together by the courts and settled in one

0:01:48.196 --> 0:01:52.516
<v Speaker 1>fell swoop. The result was that there was a tremendous

0:01:52.516 --> 0:01:56.756
<v Speaker 1>transfer of money from the big tobacco companies to these

0:01:56.956 --> 0:02:01.436
<v Speaker 1>forty six states, in which in principle, the tobacco companies

0:02:01.516 --> 0:02:04.956
<v Speaker 1>compensated the states for the money that they had spent

0:02:05.396 --> 0:02:10.116
<v Speaker 1>in dealing with the consequences of people using tobacco. On

0:02:10.156 --> 0:02:13.956
<v Speaker 1>the one hand, that settlement satisfied both the state attorneys

0:02:14.036 --> 0:02:17.996
<v Speaker 1>general and the tobacco companies. The state's got an enormous

0:02:17.996 --> 0:02:21.716
<v Speaker 1>amount of money, and the tobacco companies got a definitive

0:02:21.956 --> 0:02:24.956
<v Speaker 1>end to litigation, so they could turn around and tell

0:02:24.996 --> 0:02:28.316
<v Speaker 1>their shareholders there won't be any more lawsuits coming down

0:02:28.396 --> 0:02:32.396
<v Speaker 1>the pike against us. Yet, at the same time, the

0:02:32.476 --> 0:02:36.756
<v Speaker 1>tobacco litigation raised a deep and fundamental question of whether

0:02:36.836 --> 0:02:41.676
<v Speaker 1>the distribution of money that took place was fair. As

0:02:41.716 --> 0:02:44.396
<v Speaker 1>we're about to hear this time when it comes to

0:02:44.396 --> 0:02:48.356
<v Speaker 1>the opioid crisis, the lawsuits are actually a little bit different.

0:02:48.956 --> 0:02:52.556
<v Speaker 1>Instead of being brought only by state attorneys general, the

0:02:52.636 --> 0:02:56.636
<v Speaker 1>lawsuits are also being brought by hundreds and hundreds and

0:02:56.716 --> 0:03:01.476
<v Speaker 1>indeed thousands of local governments around the United States who

0:03:01.516 --> 0:03:04.716
<v Speaker 1>want a piece of the action and are frustrated that

0:03:04.836 --> 0:03:08.156
<v Speaker 1>they did not get direct payments from the tobacco companies

0:03:08.436 --> 0:03:12.836
<v Speaker 1>in the aftermath of the tobacco litigation settlement. As you

0:03:12.876 --> 0:03:16.436
<v Speaker 1>can tell, these issues are tricky and they are legal,

0:03:17.036 --> 0:03:20.076
<v Speaker 1>and so we turned to Professor Abby Gluck of the

0:03:20.156 --> 0:03:23.836
<v Speaker 1>Yale Law School. She is director of the Solomon Center

0:03:24.036 --> 0:03:27.236
<v Speaker 1>for Health Law and Policy at Yale, and she is

0:03:27.316 --> 0:03:33.396
<v Speaker 1>an expert in the vagaries and complexities of the opioid litigation. Abby,

0:03:33.396 --> 0:03:38.356
<v Speaker 1>We're starting to hear lots of headlines about lawsuits with

0:03:38.476 --> 0:03:42.916
<v Speaker 1>big settlements against drug companies. We're hearing about settlements that

0:03:42.956 --> 0:03:46.116
<v Speaker 1>the companies are reaching voluntarily before a case goes to trial.

0:03:46.916 --> 0:03:50.276
<v Speaker 1>Why are we hearing this? Who thinks that lawsuits are

0:03:50.276 --> 0:03:53.036
<v Speaker 1>the way to solve a problem like the opioid crisis.

0:03:53.116 --> 0:03:55.956
<v Speaker 1>So there is no health law experts who thinks that

0:03:56.116 --> 0:03:59.396
<v Speaker 1>litigation is the way to solve a massive public health crisis.

0:03:59.916 --> 0:04:05.476
<v Speaker 1>Of course, stakeholders turned to other venues first, most prominently legislatures.

0:04:05.516 --> 0:04:09.116
<v Speaker 1>State legislatures were asked to act if Congress was asked

0:04:09.236 --> 0:04:12.836
<v Speaker 1>to act. Congress pass a relatively toothless by partisan bill

0:04:12.916 --> 0:04:15.556
<v Speaker 1>that threw money at the problem but didn't actually address

0:04:15.836 --> 0:04:18.596
<v Speaker 1>most of the systemic problems that have led to the

0:04:18.676 --> 0:04:21.516
<v Speaker 1>cause of the opioid crisis. And in the States, almost

0:04:21.556 --> 0:04:24.476
<v Speaker 1>every state has passed a slew of laws, things like

0:04:25.036 --> 0:04:27.716
<v Speaker 1>laws that limit the number of pills that doctors can prescribe,

0:04:27.756 --> 0:04:30.276
<v Speaker 1>but it just hasn't been enough to get states and

0:04:30.316 --> 0:04:33.116
<v Speaker 1>local governments the relief they need. And what they need

0:04:33.196 --> 0:04:36.756
<v Speaker 1>right now is money and any money, and they're not

0:04:36.796 --> 0:04:39.196
<v Speaker 1>getting that from their governments. They're looking to the courts

0:04:39.236 --> 0:04:41.556
<v Speaker 1>to help them with that. Can I ask us somewhat

0:04:41.636 --> 0:04:45.716
<v Speaker 1>cynical questions, So is somebody gaining by these lawsuits? I mean,

0:04:45.756 --> 0:04:49.876
<v Speaker 1>are there private attorneys who are representing parties who have

0:04:49.956 --> 0:04:53.556
<v Speaker 1>money on the table to make through contingent fee agreements

0:04:53.676 --> 0:04:57.156
<v Speaker 1>or is this whole process somewhat less bound up in

0:04:57.196 --> 0:05:01.876
<v Speaker 1>those kinds of lawyer incentives than say, the tobacco lawsuits were. No,

0:05:02.076 --> 0:05:05.796
<v Speaker 1>there's definitely a lawyering story here. To really understand the

0:05:05.836 --> 0:05:09.676
<v Speaker 1>lawyering story, you have to understand the political economy of

0:05:09.716 --> 0:05:14.156
<v Speaker 1>the landscape of the opioid litigation. So There are about

0:05:14.236 --> 0:05:17.156
<v Speaker 1>twenty eight hundred cases that have currently been filed, and

0:05:17.196 --> 0:05:19.636
<v Speaker 1>they've been filed by a mix of plaintiffs. Some of

0:05:19.636 --> 0:05:22.876
<v Speaker 1>those plaintiffs are Native American tribes, some of those plaintiffs

0:05:22.916 --> 0:05:26.036
<v Speaker 1>are state attorneys general, and those plaintiffs are represented by

0:05:26.036 --> 0:05:31.796
<v Speaker 1>their typical councils. Then there are thousands of cases that

0:05:31.836 --> 0:05:34.356
<v Speaker 1>have been filed by state and local governments, and that

0:05:34.516 --> 0:05:38.556
<v Speaker 1>is a new variety, a new thread that we did

0:05:38.596 --> 0:05:41.876
<v Speaker 1>not see in the tobacco litigation and arguably comes from

0:05:41.916 --> 0:05:45.756
<v Speaker 1>the tobacco history because when the tobacco settlements were given

0:05:45.756 --> 0:05:49.076
<v Speaker 1>out several decades ago, money local governments felt that they

0:05:49.116 --> 0:05:51.676
<v Speaker 1>got the shaft. They felt that they were not given

0:05:51.716 --> 0:05:53.676
<v Speaker 1>the money they needed, that the money went into state

0:05:53.716 --> 0:05:56.596
<v Speaker 1>general treasuries, that the money was not actually directed at

0:05:56.636 --> 0:05:59.676
<v Speaker 1>tobacco cessation. So they were very open to the idea

0:05:59.756 --> 0:06:05.476
<v Speaker 1>of bringing lawsuits themselves. The plaintiffs bar approached those local

0:06:05.516 --> 0:06:09.316
<v Speaker 1>governments offers represent them on a contingency fee basis, it's

0:06:09.316 --> 0:06:12.636
<v Speaker 1>effectively risk free, and have brought those cases into court.

0:06:12.676 --> 0:06:15.196
<v Speaker 1>And that is why you're seeing thousands of cases brought

0:06:15.236 --> 0:06:17.956
<v Speaker 1>by local governments as well as state attorneys general and

0:06:18.436 --> 0:06:21.116
<v Speaker 1>to be frank many of the state attorneys general are

0:06:21.236 --> 0:06:25.236
<v Speaker 1>very unhappy that there is this local thread to the

0:06:25.316 --> 0:06:27.756
<v Speaker 1>litigation because they have made the argument that they're the

0:06:27.796 --> 0:06:29.596
<v Speaker 1>ones who are supposed to be suing on behalf of

0:06:29.596 --> 0:06:31.436
<v Speaker 1>the state. They're the ones who are supposed to be

0:06:31.476 --> 0:06:34.996
<v Speaker 1>negotiating with these companies. So this is a fascinating issue

0:06:34.996 --> 0:06:37.556
<v Speaker 1>that you're describing here, So tell me if I'm getting

0:06:37.556 --> 0:06:40.476
<v Speaker 1>it right. As a result of the tobacco litigation, in

0:06:40.516 --> 0:06:43.236
<v Speaker 1>which local governments rather than state governments, feel like they

0:06:43.236 --> 0:06:44.636
<v Speaker 1>didn't get all the money that they could have gone,

0:06:44.716 --> 0:06:45.876
<v Speaker 1>or they didn't get all the money that was on

0:06:45.916 --> 0:06:48.636
<v Speaker 1>the table, they decided they were willing to bring suits,

0:06:48.676 --> 0:06:51.956
<v Speaker 1>and they have private lawyers representing them who stand to

0:06:51.996 --> 0:06:54.356
<v Speaker 1>make money, unlike when a state suits. If it's a

0:06:54.356 --> 0:06:56.756
<v Speaker 1>state attorney general's office, they don't stand to make any

0:06:56.796 --> 0:06:59.876
<v Speaker 1>individual or personal money as a result of the lawsuit.

0:07:00.356 --> 0:07:03.076
<v Speaker 1>So the bottom line, though, is that with two eight

0:07:03.156 --> 0:07:08.236
<v Speaker 1>hundred cases, you've got a way more complicated landscape of

0:07:08.316 --> 0:07:11.676
<v Speaker 1>litigation to your term than existed even for the pretty

0:07:11.756 --> 0:07:15.356
<v Speaker 1>darn complicated tobacco litigation. Oh yeah, but actually now it's

0:07:15.436 --> 0:07:18.276
<v Speaker 1>much more complicated than that because what you have to

0:07:18.356 --> 0:07:22.316
<v Speaker 1>keep in mind is only about two thousand localities have sued,

0:07:22.356 --> 0:07:25.796
<v Speaker 1>but there are thirty thousand other cities and counties across

0:07:25.836 --> 0:07:29.116
<v Speaker 1>the United States. And everybody knows that when these two

0:07:29.156 --> 0:07:32.476
<v Speaker 1>thousand localities sue for X number of dollars, the next

0:07:32.556 --> 0:07:34.156
<v Speaker 1>day we're going to see a couple of thousand more

0:07:34.236 --> 0:07:36.356
<v Speaker 1>bringing new suits, in a couple of thousand more bringing

0:07:36.356 --> 0:07:39.476
<v Speaker 1>new suits. So the whole ballgame for the last year

0:07:39.876 --> 0:07:43.916
<v Speaker 1>has been trying to get everybody's arms around the entire

0:07:43.996 --> 0:07:46.916
<v Speaker 1>scope of liability. And that's not just these twenty eight

0:07:47.036 --> 0:07:50.236
<v Speaker 1>hundred cases. It's every possible case that might come after

0:07:50.716 --> 0:07:52.396
<v Speaker 1>that is always in the mind of the parties that

0:07:52.436 --> 0:07:54.596
<v Speaker 1>are trying to settle. That has been the challenge from

0:07:54.636 --> 0:07:59.236
<v Speaker 1>the beginning of how to effectively get global peace, even

0:07:59.236 --> 0:08:01.676
<v Speaker 1>though only a small fraction of the local governments are

0:08:01.716 --> 0:08:04.796
<v Speaker 1>actually currently in the case. So lay it out for us,

0:08:04.956 --> 0:08:09.076
<v Speaker 1>what are the possible avenues to get what a lawyer

0:08:09.236 --> 0:08:12.076
<v Speaker 1>would call global peace and what a company would call

0:08:12.436 --> 0:08:14.796
<v Speaker 1>Please nobody sue us anymore. You know, we've paid off

0:08:14.836 --> 0:08:16.716
<v Speaker 1>all the money we have to pay out, So what

0:08:16.796 --> 0:08:19.316
<v Speaker 1>are the possible paths to getting to the end of

0:08:19.356 --> 0:08:21.076
<v Speaker 1>all of this, So I have to give you a

0:08:21.116 --> 0:08:24.276
<v Speaker 1>little more background on the political landscape. So, as you know,

0:08:24.956 --> 0:08:26.836
<v Speaker 1>we have state courts in this country and we have

0:08:26.876 --> 0:08:30.396
<v Speaker 1>federal courts in this country, and neither has control over

0:08:30.436 --> 0:08:33.356
<v Speaker 1>what happens in the other side. So on the federal side,

0:08:33.636 --> 0:08:37.236
<v Speaker 1>we have several different mechanisms that allow course to aggregate

0:08:37.956 --> 0:08:40.756
<v Speaker 1>litigation when loss of similar cases are filed to try

0:08:40.756 --> 0:08:44.476
<v Speaker 1>to get to a global resolution. One of those class actions.

0:08:44.916 --> 0:08:47.476
<v Speaker 1>In the context of the opioid litigation, class actions have

0:08:47.636 --> 0:08:51.596
<v Speaker 1>not been viewed as the answer because the Supreme Court

0:08:51.636 --> 0:08:54.996
<v Speaker 1>has made it very difficult to bring class actions when

0:08:54.996 --> 0:08:58.196
<v Speaker 1>it comes to cases that involve health. The Supreme Court

0:08:58.276 --> 0:09:01.916
<v Speaker 1>requires a lot of commonality in certifying a class and

0:09:01.956 --> 0:09:03.836
<v Speaker 1>it's very hard to prove that people are harmed in

0:09:03.836 --> 0:09:05.876
<v Speaker 1>the same way when it comes to health cases. To

0:09:06.036 --> 0:09:08.676
<v Speaker 1>everybody is of the position that you're not gonna be

0:09:08.716 --> 0:09:10.636
<v Speaker 1>able to get your arms around the complete scope of

0:09:10.716 --> 0:09:13.636
<v Speaker 1>litigation just by using a class action. So what are

0:09:13.636 --> 0:09:16.036
<v Speaker 1>the other federal solutions available before we get to this

0:09:16.116 --> 0:09:19.196
<v Speaker 1>question of states? So when class actions are not available,

0:09:19.316 --> 0:09:21.836
<v Speaker 1>a different mechanism has kind of stepped into the breach

0:09:21.916 --> 0:09:24.356
<v Speaker 1>to address the problem of mass aggregation, and that's called

0:09:24.356 --> 0:09:28.716
<v Speaker 1>the multidistrict litigation. It's a comes from a federal statue

0:09:28.796 --> 0:09:31.316
<v Speaker 1>twenty eight USC. Fourteen oh seven that was passed about

0:09:31.316 --> 0:09:33.916
<v Speaker 1>fifty years ago to deal with a very different problem

0:09:34.236 --> 0:09:38.236
<v Speaker 1>of utility litigation. In the last couple decades, multi district

0:09:38.276 --> 0:09:41.516
<v Speaker 1>litigation has been resorted to when class actions are not available,

0:09:41.556 --> 0:09:43.836
<v Speaker 1>and the way it works is that it allows the

0:09:43.956 --> 0:09:47.436
<v Speaker 1>consolidation and a single federal core room for pre trial

0:09:47.556 --> 0:09:52.716
<v Speaker 1>resolution of similarly situated claims filed across the country. The

0:09:52.836 --> 0:09:56.516
<v Speaker 1>key is that it's free trial resolution. A class action

0:09:56.956 --> 0:10:00.516
<v Speaker 1>goes to the ultimate trial, the ultimate settlement, but with

0:10:00.556 --> 0:10:03.316
<v Speaker 1>the multidistrict litigation, the idea is that the judge winners

0:10:03.356 --> 0:10:07.076
<v Speaker 1>the claims, tries to streamline things, takes care of discovery

0:10:07.076 --> 0:10:09.956
<v Speaker 1>in a consolidative fashion, and then sends everybody home to

0:10:10.076 --> 0:10:12.476
<v Speaker 1>try the cases on their own jurisdictions. But the fact

0:10:12.476 --> 0:10:15.316
<v Speaker 1>of the matter is that virtually never happens. The very

0:10:15.356 --> 0:10:18.716
<v Speaker 1>fact that big cases are consolidated into an MDL in

0:10:18.756 --> 0:10:23.356
<v Speaker 1>the first place generally signals that everybody thinks a trial

0:10:23.636 --> 0:10:26.756
<v Speaker 1>or individual trials are unrealistic, and the goal of the

0:10:26.836 --> 0:10:30.876
<v Speaker 1>MDL generally is to efficiently settle the cases. That has

0:10:30.876 --> 0:10:34.236
<v Speaker 1>certainly been what's been happening in the opoid litigation. In

0:10:34.276 --> 0:10:37.956
<v Speaker 1>this litigation, about a year ago, about two thousand of

0:10:37.956 --> 0:10:41.196
<v Speaker 1>these cases were consolidated into a single federal courtroom in

0:10:41.236 --> 0:10:44.676
<v Speaker 1>Cleveland for a judge named Dan Polster. That judge said

0:10:44.676 --> 0:10:47.636
<v Speaker 1>in his very first opening statement in the case that

0:10:47.716 --> 0:10:50.156
<v Speaker 1>he was not interested in bringing these cases to trial.

0:10:50.396 --> 0:10:52.916
<v Speaker 1>He thought he was dealing with a massive, ongoing public

0:10:52.956 --> 0:10:55.356
<v Speaker 1>health crisis, and he made clear his goal was to

0:10:55.396 --> 0:10:58.156
<v Speaker 1>settle and to settle quickly. Now, that would be enough

0:10:58.196 --> 0:11:00.836
<v Speaker 1>of a challenge, but you've then got the whole state

0:11:01.196 --> 0:11:04.636
<v Speaker 1>legal landscape. There are several hundred, about four to five

0:11:04.716 --> 0:11:07.836
<v Speaker 1>hundred state cases that have been filed by state attorneys

0:11:07.836 --> 0:11:11.556
<v Speaker 1>general and other plaintiffs, including some localities, some cities and

0:11:11.596 --> 0:11:15.076
<v Speaker 1>counties in their state courts, and the federal court has

0:11:15.156 --> 0:11:18.716
<v Speaker 1>no power, no jurisdiction over those four to five hundred

0:11:18.796 --> 0:11:21.276
<v Speaker 1>state cases. So even if you could get a settlement

0:11:21.556 --> 0:11:24.556
<v Speaker 1>in the MDL in Cleveland in that big case, you're

0:11:24.596 --> 0:11:26.676
<v Speaker 1>not going to have a global settlement because they're still

0:11:26.716 --> 0:11:29.116
<v Speaker 1>going to be several hundred cases left out in the

0:11:29.156 --> 0:11:33.116
<v Speaker 1>state court system. So you're in Cleveland, you're a defendant.

0:11:33.236 --> 0:11:35.636
<v Speaker 1>You're trying to settle these claims. You want to get

0:11:35.676 --> 0:11:39.236
<v Speaker 1>global peace without the class action. The parties in Cleveland

0:11:39.236 --> 0:11:42.876
<v Speaker 1>had to get very creative over the summer. By most account,

0:11:42.916 --> 0:11:46.116
<v Speaker 1>it appears that they put their heads together and effectively

0:11:46.156 --> 0:11:49.996
<v Speaker 1>innovated a brand new form of civil procedure. They have

0:11:50.116 --> 0:11:53.516
<v Speaker 1>suggested that there should be something called a negotiation class

0:11:53.996 --> 0:11:58.316
<v Speaker 1>it's inspired by a class action, and the idea is

0:11:58.756 --> 0:12:03.916
<v Speaker 1>that they're making the argument that the localities in the

0:12:04.036 --> 0:12:07.236
<v Speaker 1>MDL are sufficiently representative of those in the rest of

0:12:07.236 --> 0:12:10.876
<v Speaker 1>the country that notice is given to all of the

0:12:10.916 --> 0:12:15.796
<v Speaker 1>localities across the country. These localities can negotiate on behalf

0:12:15.836 --> 0:12:21.396
<v Speaker 1>of everybody else and settle these cases on behalf of

0:12:21.596 --> 0:12:25.076
<v Speaker 1>all relevant counties, even the ones that are not yet

0:12:25.116 --> 0:12:28.796
<v Speaker 1>in this litigation. Now, that's that's fascinating. This is very

0:12:28.876 --> 0:12:32.116
<v Speaker 1>very important. And I want to pause here because you know,

0:12:32.836 --> 0:12:36.516
<v Speaker 1>from the lawyer's standpoint, everything you're saying crackles off the page.

0:12:36.556 --> 0:12:38.436
<v Speaker 1>But I want us to be clear for non lawyers

0:12:38.476 --> 0:12:41.116
<v Speaker 1>who might be listening. If you're still listening and hot lawyers,

0:12:41.116 --> 0:12:44.636
<v Speaker 1>please don't please don't turn the dial what is going

0:12:44.636 --> 0:12:46.196
<v Speaker 1>on here? And here's what I think would be a

0:12:46.276 --> 0:12:48.596
<v Speaker 1>useful piece of background. I think if you don't go

0:12:48.636 --> 0:12:50.636
<v Speaker 1>to law school, you hear the words class action, you

0:12:50.676 --> 0:12:54.476
<v Speaker 1>think that's something that plaintiffs want. You think that it's

0:12:54.516 --> 0:12:56.956
<v Speaker 1>people who are doing the suing who like the idea

0:12:56.956 --> 0:12:59.076
<v Speaker 1>of a class action because they can combine together the

0:12:59.076 --> 0:13:01.796
<v Speaker 1>claims of lots of different people and get a lot

0:13:01.836 --> 0:13:03.916
<v Speaker 1>of money instead of a little bit of money. But

0:13:04.196 --> 0:13:07.796
<v Speaker 1>once you enter the incredibly arcane and complex world of

0:13:07.876 --> 0:13:10.716
<v Speaker 1>class actions, you discover is there are also lots of

0:13:10.716 --> 0:13:13.596
<v Speaker 1>circumstances where the defendants, the ones who have done the

0:13:13.636 --> 0:13:17.276
<v Speaker 1>harm and are being sued, love class actions because what

0:13:17.356 --> 0:13:19.516
<v Speaker 1>they want is for the case to be over. They

0:13:19.516 --> 0:13:21.956
<v Speaker 1>want to turn around and say to their shareholders, We've

0:13:21.996 --> 0:13:24.596
<v Speaker 1>done everything we're gonna have to do, We've paid out

0:13:24.676 --> 0:13:27.036
<v Speaker 1>our last nickel, and now we can get on with

0:13:27.076 --> 0:13:30.076
<v Speaker 1>the business of being a company again without having these big,

0:13:30.116 --> 0:13:35.396
<v Speaker 1>overhanging potential civil liabilities. So, in the absence of the

0:13:35.476 --> 0:13:38.556
<v Speaker 1>opportunity for a class action, the defendants and correct me

0:13:38.596 --> 0:13:40.756
<v Speaker 1>if I'm going wrong, you're abbey, really are trying to

0:13:40.756 --> 0:13:43.316
<v Speaker 1>find some way to be sure that it's all over

0:13:43.436 --> 0:13:45.516
<v Speaker 1>that they won't settle with one group of people and

0:13:45.516 --> 0:13:47.756
<v Speaker 1>then have another group of people appear and say, hey,

0:13:47.836 --> 0:13:50.196
<v Speaker 1>guess what now, we're suing you. And it sounds, from

0:13:50.236 --> 0:13:53.356
<v Speaker 1>what you're saying, like they're trying to invent, on the

0:13:53.396 --> 0:13:57.916
<v Speaker 1>fly some new legal technology they will allow them to

0:13:57.956 --> 0:14:01.076
<v Speaker 1>be sure after they've settled cases that there won't be

0:14:01.236 --> 0:14:04.236
<v Speaker 1>new cases arising. Am I getting that right? Yeah? I

0:14:04.236 --> 0:14:08.356
<v Speaker 1>think that's right. I would ammendous slightly. I think it

0:14:08.556 --> 0:14:10.996
<v Speaker 1>was a very long thought out process that was over

0:14:11.036 --> 0:14:13.076
<v Speaker 1>the summer, so not on the fly, but also not

0:14:13.236 --> 0:14:17.116
<v Speaker 1>novel to the MDL. So multidistrict litigation because it is

0:14:17.156 --> 0:14:21.356
<v Speaker 1>this wild West form of sevil procedure that stepped into

0:14:21.396 --> 0:14:23.716
<v Speaker 1>the breach to solve a problem that it wasn't really

0:14:23.716 --> 0:14:29.716
<v Speaker 1>designed to is known for innovating new procedural mechanisms. This

0:14:29.796 --> 0:14:33.956
<v Speaker 1>is definitely that on steroids, probably the most extreme version

0:14:33.996 --> 0:14:37.796
<v Speaker 1>of creative procedural innovation that we've seen in MDL. But

0:14:37.916 --> 0:14:41.236
<v Speaker 1>it's not unprecedented in the sense that that's what mdls do.

0:14:41.796 --> 0:14:43.836
<v Speaker 1>That's why some people love them, if why some people

0:14:43.876 --> 0:14:46.796
<v Speaker 1>think they're lawless. But yes, the party's got together and

0:14:46.796 --> 0:14:49.756
<v Speaker 1>they said we need a way to get global peace.

0:14:49.916 --> 0:14:52.276
<v Speaker 1>We need a way to basically settle this case on

0:14:52.316 --> 0:14:55.516
<v Speaker 1>behalf of the entire country, even though only US slice

0:14:55.756 --> 0:14:58.316
<v Speaker 1>of local governments are actually in the case so far.

0:14:58.796 --> 0:15:00.876
<v Speaker 1>We need a way for it to look fair. So

0:15:01.076 --> 0:15:02.676
<v Speaker 1>we are going to create something that looks like a

0:15:02.716 --> 0:15:05.036
<v Speaker 1>class action, even though we can't have a class action.

0:15:05.316 --> 0:15:08.236
<v Speaker 1>We're going to send notice to thirty thousand local governments

0:15:08.276 --> 0:15:10.716
<v Speaker 1>over the next two to tell them we're going to

0:15:10.796 --> 0:15:14.436
<v Speaker 1>negotiate on your behalf unless you opt out, and once

0:15:14.476 --> 0:15:17.716
<v Speaker 1>they opt in, we're going to settle the case and

0:15:17.836 --> 0:15:20.916
<v Speaker 1>hold everybody to that. Now, if that seems wild, it is.

0:15:20.956 --> 0:15:24.196
<v Speaker 1>But remember in a regular class section, that's also what happens.

0:15:24.556 --> 0:15:28.276
<v Speaker 1>Once you put notice out and certify the class, you

0:15:28.316 --> 0:15:31.236
<v Speaker 1>can resolve a case on behalf of all of those parties,

0:15:31.236 --> 0:15:33.156
<v Speaker 1>the ones in the courtroom and the ones who aren't

0:15:33.156 --> 0:15:35.596
<v Speaker 1>in the courtroom. That's what they're trying to do. So

0:15:35.756 --> 0:15:38.196
<v Speaker 1>will it work? I think? I think the big danger

0:15:38.356 --> 0:15:40.196
<v Speaker 1>doubt it's going to be tied up in litigation for

0:15:40.236 --> 0:15:42.716
<v Speaker 1>a very long time. So I would not be surprised

0:15:43.716 --> 0:15:46.316
<v Speaker 1>if this question. Can there be such a thing as

0:15:46.316 --> 0:15:48.796
<v Speaker 1>a negotiation class makes it up to the Supreme Court.

0:15:48.876 --> 0:15:52.396
<v Speaker 1>The reason it wouldn't is that most of the parties

0:15:52.556 --> 0:15:55.516
<v Speaker 1>in these cases like it. Right, the defendant and the

0:15:55.556 --> 0:15:58.876
<v Speaker 1>plaintiffs want such a resolution. The state attorneys general have

0:15:58.996 --> 0:16:01.076
<v Speaker 1>been the ones that are the most opposed thus far.

0:16:01.516 --> 0:16:04.196
<v Speaker 1>They don't like it because it gives their local governments

0:16:04.196 --> 0:16:07.276
<v Speaker 1>a mechanism to settle these cases, even perhaps before the

0:16:07.316 --> 0:16:10.636
<v Speaker 1>state ags can get their own ettlement. So if we

0:16:10.716 --> 0:16:13.156
<v Speaker 1>see these cases going up, it's going to be I

0:16:13.196 --> 0:16:16.676
<v Speaker 1>think large part pushed by the state attorney's general trying

0:16:16.716 --> 0:16:19.036
<v Speaker 1>to get some opposition to these cases in front of

0:16:19.236 --> 0:16:21.796
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court. The other issue is that you have

0:16:21.916 --> 0:16:26.756
<v Speaker 1>to have a settlement number for a negotiation class to work.

0:16:27.036 --> 0:16:28.996
<v Speaker 1>We need two pieces. We need this new form of

0:16:29.036 --> 0:16:31.796
<v Speaker 1>civil procedure to be upheld, and then we need to

0:16:31.796 --> 0:16:34.396
<v Speaker 1>get to a settlement in the second place. Can I

0:16:34.396 --> 0:16:37.116
<v Speaker 1>ask this is obviously a very ballpark question, As you

0:16:37.156 --> 0:16:39.836
<v Speaker 1>point out, negotiations can break down at any moment. But

0:16:39.876 --> 0:16:42.396
<v Speaker 1>what's the order of magnitude that a settlement would take?

0:16:42.436 --> 0:16:44.796
<v Speaker 1>How many billions of dollars are we actually talking about?

0:16:45.076 --> 0:16:48.276
<v Speaker 1>So I don't think anybody really knows the complaints that

0:16:48.316 --> 0:16:50.476
<v Speaker 1>were filed in these cases did not ask for any

0:16:50.516 --> 0:16:54.156
<v Speaker 1>specific numbers, so we're talking. You know, it would be

0:16:54.156 --> 0:16:57.436
<v Speaker 1>surprising if the number was less than fifty billion, and

0:16:57.996 --> 0:17:00.476
<v Speaker 1>most likely in the end it'll be something higher than that.

0:17:00.636 --> 0:17:03.796
<v Speaker 1>But again, it's risk, it a hazard, a guess. So

0:17:03.916 --> 0:17:06.556
<v Speaker 1>when that money, if when? And if obviously it's a

0:17:06.556 --> 0:17:08.876
<v Speaker 1>big if. If there is some kind of a settlement

0:17:09.676 --> 0:17:16.436
<v Speaker 1>going from the companies that manufactured the opioids to cities, towns,

0:17:16.436 --> 0:17:20.596
<v Speaker 1>and states, what in the real world is likely actually

0:17:20.716 --> 0:17:22.796
<v Speaker 1>to happen to that money? I mean, some of it

0:17:22.836 --> 0:17:26.276
<v Speaker 1>obviously will go into general budget in places that have

0:17:26.436 --> 0:17:29.956
<v Speaker 1>overspent their existing budgets trying to deal with the fall

0:17:29.956 --> 0:17:32.676
<v Speaker 1>out of the opioid crisis. But will there be any

0:17:32.956 --> 0:17:36.156
<v Speaker 1>prevention element there? Is it all going to be just

0:17:36.236 --> 0:17:39.596
<v Speaker 1>to play catch up against past damages. In the real world,

0:17:39.676 --> 0:17:43.796
<v Speaker 1>what will all that money meet? Well, I think your

0:17:43.996 --> 0:17:45.916
<v Speaker 1>assumption that some of that money is going to go

0:17:45.916 --> 0:17:49.316
<v Speaker 1>into the state general treasury may not ultimately prove to

0:17:49.356 --> 0:17:52.276
<v Speaker 1>be the case. That turned out to be one of

0:17:52.276 --> 0:17:55.956
<v Speaker 1>the most controversial outcomes of the tobacco litigation that the

0:17:55.996 --> 0:17:58.756
<v Speaker 1>money went to state general treasuries and wasn't specifically directed

0:17:58.756 --> 0:18:01.996
<v Speaker 1>toward abatement or prevention. And that's what a lot of

0:18:02.436 --> 0:18:06.236
<v Speaker 1>the plaintiffs in these cases are trying to avoid. There's

0:18:06.276 --> 0:18:09.756
<v Speaker 1>going to be a fight again internal to each date

0:18:09.796 --> 0:18:11.996
<v Speaker 1>about how this money is spent and who controls it.

0:18:12.596 --> 0:18:15.236
<v Speaker 1>In Oklahoma, over the summer, they were supposed to be

0:18:15.276 --> 0:18:17.476
<v Speaker 1>a trial against a bunch of companies. Some of the

0:18:17.516 --> 0:18:21.476
<v Speaker 1>companies settled and the very first settlement, Perdue Pharma, settled

0:18:21.476 --> 0:18:23.876
<v Speaker 1>with the state of Oklahoma and the money was sent

0:18:24.036 --> 0:18:27.036
<v Speaker 1>to a university precisely so that it would not go

0:18:27.076 --> 0:18:31.196
<v Speaker 1>into the state general treasury. The Oklahoma legislature got very upset,

0:18:31.956 --> 0:18:35.036
<v Speaker 1>where's a huge ruckus. So the next settlement that came around,

0:18:35.076 --> 0:18:39.076
<v Speaker 1>which was Tava the generic manufacturer, that money did go

0:18:39.236 --> 0:18:41.476
<v Speaker 1>to the Oklahoma treasury. So that's a great example of

0:18:41.516 --> 0:18:43.436
<v Speaker 1>the kind of fights you're going to see as the

0:18:43.436 --> 0:18:47.956
<v Speaker 1>settlement numbers come out. And that's because politicians or politicians,

0:18:47.956 --> 0:18:50.156
<v Speaker 1>and when money is on the table, each one of

0:18:50.156 --> 0:18:53.876
<v Speaker 1>them is going to want it for their relevant constituency. Yeah,

0:18:53.876 --> 0:18:55.476
<v Speaker 1>it also happens to be the case that when state

0:18:55.516 --> 0:19:00.396
<v Speaker 1>attorneys generals sue the way their recovery funds work, the

0:19:00.436 --> 0:19:03.836
<v Speaker 1>money isn't always directly sent to the target of the

0:19:03.876 --> 0:19:05.796
<v Speaker 1>lawsuits in the first place. Theories that were harmed there

0:19:05.796 --> 0:19:08.676
<v Speaker 1>often go to the general fund. That was what happened

0:19:08.716 --> 0:19:11.836
<v Speaker 1>with Echo. In the case of a public health crisis,

0:19:11.836 --> 0:19:14.196
<v Speaker 1>where there are some counties within a state that have

0:19:14.316 --> 0:19:17.636
<v Speaker 1>been hurting more than other counties and different kinds of harms,

0:19:17.676 --> 0:19:20.116
<v Speaker 1>prevention and treatment are not the same kind of harms,

0:19:20.156 --> 0:19:22.316
<v Speaker 1>money has to go to different places to deal with

0:19:22.316 --> 0:19:26.476
<v Speaker 1>prevention and treatment. It's complicated, and a good use of

0:19:26.476 --> 0:19:31.036
<v Speaker 1>the funds would think through the various causes of the crisis,

0:19:31.076 --> 0:19:32.996
<v Speaker 1>the various ways in which the counties are hurting, and

0:19:33.036 --> 0:19:35.236
<v Speaker 1>trying to make sure those funds are directed in some way.

0:19:35.476 --> 0:19:37.636
<v Speaker 1>What I'm hearing is not optimism from you. I mean,

0:19:37.636 --> 0:19:40.796
<v Speaker 1>I'm not hearing from you either that there's great optimism

0:19:40.836 --> 0:19:43.636
<v Speaker 1>that this will all be solved soon, or that the

0:19:43.836 --> 0:19:46.956
<v Speaker 1>large sum of money that's going to eventually change hands

0:19:47.356 --> 0:19:49.876
<v Speaker 1>is necessarily going to be used in ways that are

0:19:49.916 --> 0:19:53.356
<v Speaker 1>actually in the real world effective. So my first question is,

0:19:53.596 --> 0:19:55.956
<v Speaker 1>on this point, am I right that I'm not hearing

0:19:55.956 --> 0:19:57.556
<v Speaker 1>a lot of optimism. I mean, I think if your

0:19:57.556 --> 0:19:59.556
<v Speaker 1>abbey is a very optimistic person, you want you like

0:19:59.636 --> 0:20:01.476
<v Speaker 1>to solve things and make them work better. But you

0:20:01.516 --> 0:20:03.596
<v Speaker 1>don't sound so optimistic this time. Now. I think you're

0:20:03.636 --> 0:20:07.316
<v Speaker 1>overreading my pessimism, so it's more of a realism. I'm

0:20:07.316 --> 0:20:09.876
<v Speaker 1>optimistic that there's going to be a settlement. I am

0:20:10.036 --> 0:20:12.836
<v Speaker 1>less certain that the money is going to be dispersed

0:20:12.876 --> 0:20:15.636
<v Speaker 1>in ways that are actually targeted to the problem. I'm

0:20:15.716 --> 0:20:20.436
<v Speaker 1>encouraged by some states efforts to start drafting legislation in

0:20:20.516 --> 0:20:23.676
<v Speaker 1>preparation for the receipt of these funds to say when

0:20:23.716 --> 0:20:26.076
<v Speaker 1>money comes in, it has to go to X, Y

0:20:26.116 --> 0:20:27.876
<v Speaker 1>and Z. I think that would be helpful. I also

0:20:27.916 --> 0:20:30.756
<v Speaker 1>think that we have a judge in Cleveland who has

0:20:30.836 --> 0:20:32.596
<v Speaker 1>not been afraid to get his hands in this to

0:20:32.676 --> 0:20:35.996
<v Speaker 1>this and he does not seem to be running out

0:20:36.076 --> 0:20:37.996
<v Speaker 1>the door right So I think when we get a

0:20:37.996 --> 0:20:40.476
<v Speaker 1>settlement from him and an idea world, the settlement is

0:20:40.476 --> 0:20:42.556
<v Speaker 1>going to be structured, is going to say where the

0:20:42.596 --> 0:20:44.796
<v Speaker 1>money is going to go, and Judge Polster is going

0:20:44.836 --> 0:20:49.956
<v Speaker 1>to watch it. But I am less optimistic that money

0:20:50.316 --> 0:20:52.716
<v Speaker 1>is going to solve a public health crisis. I don't

0:20:52.716 --> 0:20:55.396
<v Speaker 1>think any health expert thinks that money can abate a

0:20:55.436 --> 0:20:59.036
<v Speaker 1>public health crisis. Money can help cities put money back

0:20:59.076 --> 0:21:00.836
<v Speaker 1>in their coffers when they've already paid for a health

0:21:00.836 --> 0:21:04.036
<v Speaker 1>public health crisis. But we have fourteen states that haven't

0:21:04.076 --> 0:21:07.196
<v Speaker 1>expanded Medicaid. That's a huge portion of the population that

0:21:07.236 --> 0:21:09.836
<v Speaker 1>has no access to healthcare because they don't have insurance.

0:21:10.356 --> 0:21:12.716
<v Speaker 1>That would do a heck of a lot to help

0:21:12.756 --> 0:21:14.916
<v Speaker 1>the public health crisis. That's a legal solution that has

0:21:14.956 --> 0:21:17.556
<v Speaker 1>nothing to do what's going on in the courtroom. We

0:21:17.636 --> 0:21:20.636
<v Speaker 1>also have some very antiquated federal laws on the books

0:21:20.676 --> 0:21:24.196
<v Speaker 1>that make it extremely difficult for doctors to treat opioid

0:21:24.276 --> 0:21:26.996
<v Speaker 1>use disorder and addiction. It requires you to go to

0:21:26.996 --> 0:21:30.396
<v Speaker 1>a separate location, not your doctor's office, to get methadone.

0:21:30.756 --> 0:21:33.636
<v Speaker 1>That's a barrier, and it actually limits the number of

0:21:33.676 --> 0:21:36.476
<v Speaker 1>patients any one doctor can treat for opioid addiction with

0:21:36.516 --> 0:21:39.076
<v Speaker 1>another drug boot for norphine at a time. We don't

0:21:39.076 --> 0:21:41.916
<v Speaker 1>regulate any other kind of treatment this way. It's any

0:21:41.996 --> 0:21:45.116
<v Speaker 1>Joe Schmo can prescribe an opioid, and when people get addicted,

0:21:45.756 --> 0:21:48.676
<v Speaker 1>it's very hard to treat them. And those are legal problems,

0:21:48.716 --> 0:21:50.796
<v Speaker 1>those are system problems, and none of that is going

0:21:50.836 --> 0:21:54.756
<v Speaker 1>to be solved by this litigation. Does any other country

0:21:54.836 --> 0:21:59.116
<v Speaker 1>on Earth think that litigation is even part of the

0:21:59.156 --> 0:22:02.276
<v Speaker 1>way you should go about addressing crises like these, or

0:22:02.396 --> 0:22:06.236
<v Speaker 1>is this a craziness that is distinctively American? You know,

0:22:06.316 --> 0:22:09.916
<v Speaker 1>to my knowledgist is a uniquely American phenomena. But that

0:22:10.076 --> 0:22:12.356
<v Speaker 1>is the backbone of our litigation system. You know, we

0:22:12.516 --> 0:22:16.356
<v Speaker 1>use our litigation system and the adversary system to hold

0:22:16.356 --> 0:22:20.196
<v Speaker 1>the government accountable, to hold parties an accountable pro and con.

0:22:20.636 --> 0:22:22.916
<v Speaker 1>But we are unique in this regard. A lot of

0:22:22.916 --> 0:22:26.236
<v Speaker 1>countries look on us, I think with an eyebrow raised.

0:22:26.836 --> 0:22:28.476
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I think it might have to be more

0:22:28.516 --> 0:22:31.476
<v Speaker 1>than an eyebrows as we walk into this crisis, do

0:22:31.476 --> 0:22:34.596
<v Speaker 1>you have any faith that when there is some other

0:22:34.756 --> 0:22:38.596
<v Speaker 1>similar crisis, the next public health crisis generated by big

0:22:38.636 --> 0:22:41.716
<v Speaker 1>companies of some kind or another, that they would take

0:22:41.756 --> 0:22:43.516
<v Speaker 1>a deep breath before trying to make a lot of

0:22:43.556 --> 0:22:47.076
<v Speaker 1>money on a product like tobacco or like opioids, thinking

0:22:47.516 --> 0:22:49.556
<v Speaker 1>somewhere down the road, we're going to have to pay

0:22:49.596 --> 0:22:52.276
<v Speaker 1>a very high price. Or do you think that rational?

0:22:53.156 --> 0:22:56.956
<v Speaker 1>You know, money maximizing corporate actors in the future would say,

0:22:57.436 --> 0:23:00.076
<v Speaker 1>you know what, it's always a question of rolling the dice.

0:23:00.116 --> 0:23:01.876
<v Speaker 1>Here in the United States, and we always know we

0:23:01.916 --> 0:23:03.716
<v Speaker 1>could get sued whether we did anything bad or not.

0:23:04.116 --> 0:23:05.876
<v Speaker 1>So let's just try to make as much money as

0:23:05.916 --> 0:23:09.036
<v Speaker 1>we can and if we're sued, eventually we'll deal with

0:23:09.196 --> 0:23:10.996
<v Speaker 1>that problem, will be come to it. Because if that's

0:23:10.996 --> 0:23:13.596
<v Speaker 1>the case, then I feel as though we're in a

0:23:13.716 --> 0:23:16.676
<v Speaker 1>kind of repetition compulsion that we just we do the

0:23:16.676 --> 0:23:18.796
<v Speaker 1>same thing again and again and again, and as you say,

0:23:18.836 --> 0:23:20.396
<v Speaker 1>we use the money to abate it, but we don't

0:23:20.436 --> 0:23:22.836
<v Speaker 1>really solve it, you know. I think that that question

0:23:23.036 --> 0:23:27.396
<v Speaker 1>overlooks key factors about both the tobacco cases and the

0:23:27.436 --> 0:23:30.156
<v Speaker 1>opioid cases, and that is that this is not just

0:23:30.236 --> 0:23:34.236
<v Speaker 1>a case of a successful drug that had unforeseen side

0:23:34.236 --> 0:23:38.196
<v Speaker 1>effects that addicted a lot of people and caused a

0:23:38.196 --> 0:23:42.196
<v Speaker 1>lot of health problems. This, at least according to the allegations,

0:23:42.916 --> 0:23:46.076
<v Speaker 1>is like tobacco, is a case in which companies had

0:23:46.116 --> 0:23:51.076
<v Speaker 1>a drug, they knew the drug had addictive and harmful properties,

0:23:51.276 --> 0:23:54.756
<v Speaker 1>and covered that up and then made money off of it.

0:23:54.836 --> 0:23:59.476
<v Speaker 1>So it's not just litigation that is a deterrent, it's

0:23:59.476 --> 0:24:03.316
<v Speaker 1>sort of honest services in corporate dealing that should be

0:24:03.356 --> 0:24:06.156
<v Speaker 1>a deterrent for this. So I don't think you're going

0:24:06.236 --> 0:24:09.476
<v Speaker 1>to stop American capitalist. I'm trying to maximize the office

0:24:09.556 --> 0:24:13.276
<v Speaker 1>from a successful drug that remember, has valid medical uses,

0:24:13.676 --> 0:24:17.916
<v Speaker 1>is approved by the FDA, is necessary for many kinds

0:24:17.956 --> 0:24:21.556
<v Speaker 1>of surgeries and for people dying with cancer. So you know,

0:24:21.756 --> 0:24:26.676
<v Speaker 1>a company, arguably shouldn't you be deterred from producing those

0:24:26.756 --> 0:24:29.476
<v Speaker 1>kinds of drugs because they're helpful to society. But what

0:24:29.516 --> 0:24:32.996
<v Speaker 1>this litigation should hopefully deter companies from doing is a lying,

0:24:33.156 --> 0:24:38.036
<v Speaker 1>covering up, committing arguable acts of fraud on the public

0:24:38.436 --> 0:24:41.676
<v Speaker 1>to get people hooked on drugs that they're representing is

0:24:41.756 --> 0:24:44.476
<v Speaker 1>not addictive. Now, we haven't had a trial, those claims

0:24:44.476 --> 0:24:48.316
<v Speaker 1>haven't improved, but those are the allegations that are being made.

0:24:48.716 --> 0:24:51.596
<v Speaker 1>Those are the kinds of things that we're particularly damaging

0:24:51.596 --> 0:24:53.676
<v Speaker 1>to Johnson and Johnson when they went on trial in

0:24:53.716 --> 0:24:57.636
<v Speaker 1>Ohio and Oklahoma and some public documents came out. I

0:24:57.676 --> 0:25:01.196
<v Speaker 1>think that's why we're seeing this move towards settlement. These

0:25:01.236 --> 0:25:03.556
<v Speaker 1>companies don't want to go on trial. They don't want

0:25:03.596 --> 0:25:05.916
<v Speaker 1>to incur the kind of reputational harm that would come

0:25:05.956 --> 0:25:10.036
<v Speaker 1>from not from trying to maximize profits, but from covering

0:25:10.156 --> 0:25:13.516
<v Speaker 1>up harmful aspects of a drug. That they're aggressively marketing

0:25:13.516 --> 0:25:16.156
<v Speaker 1>and not telling anybody about I think that's a deterrent.

0:25:16.276 --> 0:25:18.956
<v Speaker 1>I hope that's the deterrent, and we'll have to see

0:25:19.236 --> 0:25:21.116
<v Speaker 1>if the numbers are big enough to make that happen.

0:25:22.236 --> 0:25:24.116
<v Speaker 1>Is that enough of a deterrent though, I mean, I mean,

0:25:24.156 --> 0:25:26.156
<v Speaker 1>if you know that when push comes to shove you

0:25:26.196 --> 0:25:29.236
<v Speaker 1>can settle rather than take the embarrassment. Sure it's going

0:25:29.316 --> 0:25:30.836
<v Speaker 1>to cost you some money down the road, but it

0:25:30.836 --> 0:25:33.276
<v Speaker 1>doesn't seem like a very powerful deterrent to lying. I mean,

0:25:33.676 --> 0:25:36.516
<v Speaker 1>you know, if people working for companies have actually lied

0:25:36.636 --> 0:25:41.636
<v Speaker 1>and covered up very dangerous consequences of their products, shouldn't

0:25:41.636 --> 0:25:45.236
<v Speaker 1>we be talking more in terms of criminal sanctions. There

0:25:46.836 --> 0:25:48.956
<v Speaker 1>are of criminal cases that have been filed, so I

0:25:48.956 --> 0:25:50.516
<v Speaker 1>do think that's part of the agin. It's a vague

0:25:50.516 --> 0:25:52.476
<v Speaker 1>part of the puzzle, right, So we have seen a

0:25:52.516 --> 0:25:55.116
<v Speaker 1>bunch of criminal cases. We also are seeing companies going

0:25:55.116 --> 0:25:56.956
<v Speaker 1>out of business over this perdue, farmers going to go

0:25:56.996 --> 0:26:00.236
<v Speaker 1>out of business over this right. So if that's not

0:26:00.316 --> 0:26:02.636
<v Speaker 1>enough of a deterrent, then we need sort of a

0:26:02.796 --> 0:26:06.116
<v Speaker 1>wholesale revamping of our of our legal system. But hopefully

0:26:06.116 --> 0:26:10.476
<v Speaker 1>criminal charges, reputational damage and the potential for going out

0:26:10.476 --> 0:26:14.756
<v Speaker 1>of business should be enough to get companies sacked. Last question, Abby,

0:26:14.876 --> 0:26:17.596
<v Speaker 1>So all of what we've been talking about is about

0:26:17.676 --> 0:26:21.556
<v Speaker 1>trying to hold the pharma company is liable for what

0:26:21.636 --> 0:26:25.636
<v Speaker 1>they've done. Is there something that the rest of us

0:26:25.796 --> 0:26:29.996
<v Speaker 1>consumers should be doing now we're or in the future

0:26:30.356 --> 0:26:32.956
<v Speaker 1>to think about what we might do to try to

0:26:32.996 --> 0:26:36.356
<v Speaker 1>avoid crises like this arising in the future. Or is

0:26:36.396 --> 0:26:39.596
<v Speaker 1>it really just a question of tweaking the system, making

0:26:39.636 --> 0:26:43.476
<v Speaker 1>it work properly, and creating the right incentives so that

0:26:43.636 --> 0:26:46.596
<v Speaker 1>companies that obviously have much more information about the content

0:26:46.716 --> 0:26:49.876
<v Speaker 1>of what they're making and the effects of their products

0:26:49.916 --> 0:26:53.356
<v Speaker 1>than we do can be held responsible. Well, I think

0:26:53.356 --> 0:26:55.556
<v Speaker 1>you have to understand that the opoid crisis was not

0:26:55.676 --> 0:27:00.196
<v Speaker 1>caused by people with back pain taking too many drugs. Right.

0:27:00.516 --> 0:27:04.516
<v Speaker 1>The drugs were put into the market through the FDA

0:27:04.676 --> 0:27:08.596
<v Speaker 1>through medical practice. People did become addicted to them, but

0:27:08.636 --> 0:27:13.356
<v Speaker 1>then they were diverted to recreational use. That recreational market

0:27:13.396 --> 0:27:17.916
<v Speaker 1>picked up significantly. People saw an opportunity. Cheap synthetic versions

0:27:17.916 --> 0:27:20.476
<v Speaker 1>of that drug were then brought in just like other

0:27:20.596 --> 0:27:24.196
<v Speaker 1>drugs like heroin. Right, it's not that different, And so

0:27:24.476 --> 0:27:27.116
<v Speaker 1>I think that where we are right now, in this

0:27:27.156 --> 0:27:30.436
<v Speaker 1>phase of the crisis, it's not a consumer issue anymore.

0:27:30.556 --> 0:27:34.156
<v Speaker 1>It started out as a consumer issue, it has become

0:27:34.356 --> 0:27:38.836
<v Speaker 1>a recreational, street level drug use issue that is of

0:27:38.876 --> 0:27:42.956
<v Speaker 1>a different nature, and so it can't possibly be averted

0:27:43.356 --> 0:27:47.676
<v Speaker 1>by consumers anymore. Consumers can ask doctors questions, consumers can

0:27:47.676 --> 0:27:51.796
<v Speaker 1>try to recognize symptoms of addiction and not be embarrassed

0:27:51.836 --> 0:27:54.276
<v Speaker 1>to go to their doctor and talk about addiction. But

0:27:54.396 --> 0:27:58.316
<v Speaker 1>the crisis got far bigger than doctor's offices. You know,

0:27:58.356 --> 0:28:00.636
<v Speaker 1>a number of years ago, there was an early wave

0:28:00.676 --> 0:28:03.516
<v Speaker 1>of prosecutions what we're called so called pill mills doctors

0:28:03.556 --> 0:28:06.436
<v Speaker 1>that were distributing too many drugs. Where we are now

0:28:06.596 --> 0:28:09.436
<v Speaker 1>is far beyond that. You don't hear about pill mill kings.

0:28:09.676 --> 0:28:13.076
<v Speaker 1>We're hearing about major drug trafficking, worring about people dying

0:28:13.116 --> 0:28:15.356
<v Speaker 1>from a single dose of a drug that looks like

0:28:15.396 --> 0:28:18.196
<v Speaker 1>an opioid but is laced with a synthetic version of

0:28:18.196 --> 0:28:20.516
<v Speaker 1>it that is so dangerous that it can kill a

0:28:20.516 --> 0:28:23.356
<v Speaker 1>teenager with one drug. It's a very different problem than

0:28:23.396 --> 0:28:26.956
<v Speaker 1>just a consumer drug problem. I mean, thank you so

0:28:27.036 --> 0:28:30.636
<v Speaker 1>much for analyzing this, for clarifying it, and for showing us,

0:28:30.956 --> 0:28:33.436
<v Speaker 1>in fact just how hard it is to get a

0:28:33.436 --> 0:28:37.156
<v Speaker 1>solution here, but also for providing some optimism about how

0:28:37.196 --> 0:28:39.196
<v Speaker 1>we're going to work our way through it going forward.

0:28:39.236 --> 0:28:40.836
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much for your time. Yeah, I hope so,

0:28:40.956 --> 0:28:49.156
<v Speaker 1>thanks so much. Noah. Now for our sound of the week,

0:28:49.636 --> 0:28:55.276
<v Speaker 1>or really two sounds. First, this familiar voice, mister gerbaschof

0:28:56.276 --> 0:29:00.636
<v Speaker 1>teared down this wall. And then just two years later

0:29:01.396 --> 0:29:09.516
<v Speaker 1>this happened. That was the sound of celebration, almost exactly

0:29:09.716 --> 0:29:13.036
<v Speaker 1>thirty years ago, when the Berlin Wall in fact was

0:29:13.076 --> 0:29:16.156
<v Speaker 1>breached and people began to be able to move freely

0:29:16.236 --> 0:29:20.596
<v Speaker 1>back and forth between West and East Berlin. This thirtieth

0:29:20.636 --> 0:29:24.276
<v Speaker 1>anniversary is really, in a sense, the anniversary of the

0:29:24.476 --> 0:29:28.916
<v Speaker 1>end of the Cold War, and it raises a fascinating question.

0:29:29.476 --> 0:29:33.036
<v Speaker 1>Who won. To listen to Ronald Reagan tell it, it

0:29:33.116 --> 0:29:36.556
<v Speaker 1>was the West that won, with its distinctive combination of

0:29:36.676 --> 0:29:41.596
<v Speaker 1>free market economies and liberal democracy. And that's the narrative

0:29:41.716 --> 0:29:44.596
<v Speaker 1>that cut on in much of the world in the

0:29:44.636 --> 0:29:48.436
<v Speaker 1>aftermath of the Cold War. It's certainly the narrative that

0:29:48.556 --> 0:29:51.436
<v Speaker 1>cut on in the West. Decide the thought of itself

0:29:51.596 --> 0:29:56.916
<v Speaker 1>as having won a victory today, it's not so obvious

0:29:56.956 --> 0:30:00.236
<v Speaker 1>who won the Cold War, it is still pretty clear

0:30:00.396 --> 0:30:04.756
<v Speaker 1>that communism as an economic system did lose to capitalism.

0:30:05.316 --> 0:30:09.196
<v Speaker 1>After all, in the direct aftermath of the fall of

0:30:09.196 --> 0:30:13.596
<v Speaker 1>Berlin Wall, the entire Soviet Bloc gave up on communist

0:30:13.596 --> 0:30:18.796
<v Speaker 1>economic organization and headed in the direction of a market economy. Meanwhile,

0:30:18.956 --> 0:30:22.196
<v Speaker 1>in the same years, the government of China, though in

0:30:22.356 --> 0:30:27.436
<v Speaker 1>theory remaining communist, adopted what is essentially a capitalist version

0:30:27.796 --> 0:30:33.436
<v Speaker 1>of state owned business. It's still not Western free market capitalism,

0:30:33.636 --> 0:30:36.836
<v Speaker 1>but it's a distinctive form of Chinese capitalism that the

0:30:36.956 --> 0:30:41.156
<v Speaker 1>Chinese call socialism with Chinese characteristics. That only makes sense

0:30:41.196 --> 0:30:43.516
<v Speaker 1>if you realize that the Chinese characteristics are that it's

0:30:43.556 --> 0:30:48.516
<v Speaker 1>not really socialism. And the consequence of that grand transition

0:30:48.756 --> 0:30:53.276
<v Speaker 1>of formerly communist economies into capitalist economies has been nothing

0:30:53.356 --> 0:30:56.796
<v Speaker 1>short of amazing. China rose to become the number two

0:30:56.836 --> 0:30:59.716
<v Speaker 1>economy in the world, and it's on track eventually to

0:30:59.836 --> 0:31:03.036
<v Speaker 1>exceed the economy of the United States. That was a

0:31:03.116 --> 0:31:06.636
<v Speaker 1>direct objective proof of what could happen when you just

0:31:06.756 --> 0:31:12.436
<v Speaker 1>took away the structure of commun economic organization. No one

0:31:12.516 --> 0:31:17.676
<v Speaker 1>today is a serious communist from an economic standpoint, even

0:31:18.076 --> 0:31:23.196
<v Speaker 1>holdouts like Cuba and North Korea are gradually investing in

0:31:23.236 --> 0:31:28.676
<v Speaker 1>the process of marketizing or in other words, capitalizing their economies.

0:31:30.236 --> 0:31:34.236
<v Speaker 1>Yet the idea that liberal democracy had won a victory

0:31:34.556 --> 0:31:40.396
<v Speaker 1>over unfree forms of authoritarian government looks increasingly doubtful in

0:31:40.436 --> 0:31:45.236
<v Speaker 1>the light of events of recent years. China, the same

0:31:45.276 --> 0:31:50.156
<v Speaker 1>country that adopted capitalism, made no steps whatsoever in the

0:31:50.196 --> 0:31:54.556
<v Speaker 1>direction of liberalizing politics in its country, and no steps

0:31:54.596 --> 0:31:59.356
<v Speaker 1>in the direction of becoming more democratic, despite its authoritarian

0:31:59.436 --> 0:32:01.836
<v Speaker 1>system of government that is in fact only gotten more

0:32:01.876 --> 0:32:06.676
<v Speaker 1>authoritarian in the era of Shijinping. China's economic growth has

0:32:06.876 --> 0:32:12.276
<v Speaker 1>continued partly the influence of this Chinese model. Countries around

0:32:12.316 --> 0:32:15.476
<v Speaker 1>the world that we're experimenting with liberal democracy in the

0:32:15.476 --> 0:32:18.956
<v Speaker 1>aftermath of the Cold War have begun to back away

0:32:18.996 --> 0:32:22.196
<v Speaker 1>from that model. You can think of this in the

0:32:22.236 --> 0:32:26.316
<v Speaker 1>case of countries like Hungry or Turkey that had democracy,

0:32:26.596 --> 0:32:30.636
<v Speaker 1>had elections and then elected strong man leaders, or slowly

0:32:30.676 --> 0:32:35.596
<v Speaker 1>but surely ironing the basic democratic freedoms that we associate

0:32:35.756 --> 0:32:39.796
<v Speaker 1>with liberal government. If you're a country that's today trying

0:32:39.836 --> 0:32:42.516
<v Speaker 1>to figure out how to reform yourself, it's obvious that

0:32:42.556 --> 0:32:45.036
<v Speaker 1>you had head in the direction of greater capitalism, but

0:32:45.116 --> 0:32:47.636
<v Speaker 1>it's not at all obvious that you had head in

0:32:47.676 --> 0:32:51.556
<v Speaker 1>the direction of greater political freedom. And indeed, the rise

0:32:51.596 --> 0:32:56.076
<v Speaker 1>of populism has even undercut liberal democratic institutions in countries

0:32:56.076 --> 0:32:58.836
<v Speaker 1>that we think of as lying in the heartland of

0:32:58.876 --> 0:33:02.516
<v Speaker 1>traditional democracy, countries like the United States in the Donald

0:33:02.516 --> 0:33:06.436
<v Speaker 1>Trump administration, and even countries like Britain, which is, of

0:33:06.476 --> 0:33:11.596
<v Speaker 1>course the original home of modern liberal democracy. What should

0:33:11.596 --> 0:33:14.516
<v Speaker 1>we make of the fact the capitalism is doing great

0:33:14.796 --> 0:33:18.596
<v Speaker 1>but liberal democracy is in a certain amount of trouble.

0:33:19.156 --> 0:33:21.076
<v Speaker 1>The first lesson I think we should take away from

0:33:21.116 --> 0:33:23.836
<v Speaker 1>that is that history takes a long time to play

0:33:23.836 --> 0:33:27.356
<v Speaker 1>itself out. In the Euphoria thirty years ago, after the

0:33:27.396 --> 0:33:30.356
<v Speaker 1>fall of the Berlin Wall, it was easy to imagine

0:33:30.476 --> 0:33:33.516
<v Speaker 1>that every aspect of the West had defeated every aspect

0:33:33.516 --> 0:33:36.716
<v Speaker 1>of communism, and in retrospect it's pretty clear that that

0:33:36.836 --> 0:33:42.196
<v Speaker 1>just wasn't so. The second takeaway is that liberal democracies

0:33:42.276 --> 0:33:45.076
<v Speaker 1>can no longer rest on their laurels and say that

0:33:45.116 --> 0:33:47.796
<v Speaker 1>the reason liberal democracy is a good form of government

0:33:48.076 --> 0:33:50.556
<v Speaker 1>is that it will help you defeat your enemies by

0:33:50.636 --> 0:33:53.396
<v Speaker 1>making your country the richest and strongest country that it

0:33:53.436 --> 0:33:56.716
<v Speaker 1>can possibly be. That argument sounded pretty good in the

0:33:56.716 --> 0:33:59.916
<v Speaker 1>aftermath of the Cold War. That argument sounds terrible today.

0:34:00.556 --> 0:34:03.396
<v Speaker 1>In its place, liberal democracies have to come up with

0:34:03.436 --> 0:34:06.676
<v Speaker 1>a different argument, one that says that democracy is good

0:34:06.996 --> 0:34:10.476
<v Speaker 1>on its own terms. That the reason we should have

0:34:10.596 --> 0:34:13.796
<v Speaker 1>voting is that every human being is genuinely entitled to

0:34:13.836 --> 0:34:16.516
<v Speaker 1>a say that the reason that we have liberal rights

0:34:16.836 --> 0:34:19.996
<v Speaker 1>is that each human being is entitled to be protected

0:34:20.196 --> 0:34:23.596
<v Speaker 1>in his or her fundamental dignity. That the reason we

0:34:23.636 --> 0:34:26.116
<v Speaker 1>have freedom of expression is that part of the human

0:34:26.156 --> 0:34:29.036
<v Speaker 1>experience that makes it worth being alive is the chance

0:34:29.036 --> 0:34:32.596
<v Speaker 1>to express your views and try to influence others. The

0:34:32.716 --> 0:34:37.076
<v Speaker 1>upshot is that democracy cannot say any longer be a

0:34:37.116 --> 0:34:40.996
<v Speaker 1>democrat and win your wars. It must say be a democrat,

0:34:41.036 --> 0:34:45.916
<v Speaker 1>because democracy is inherently valuable, even if it doesn't always

0:34:45.956 --> 0:34:48.796
<v Speaker 1>make your country the most powerful one on the block.

0:34:53.316 --> 0:34:56.236
<v Speaker 1>Deep Background is brought to you by Pushkin Industries. Our

0:34:56.276 --> 0:34:59.636
<v Speaker 1>producer is Lydia Genecott, with engineering by Jason Gambrel and

0:34:59.756 --> 0:35:03.636
<v Speaker 1>Jason Rostkowski. Our showrunner is Sophie mckibbon. Our theme music

0:35:03.716 --> 0:35:06.556
<v Speaker 1>is composed by Luis GERA special thanks to the Pushkin

0:35:06.596 --> 0:35:10.316
<v Speaker 1>Brass Malcolm Gladwell, Jacob Weisberg, and mi A Lobel. I'm

0:35:10.356 --> 0:35:12.756
<v Speaker 1>Noah Feldman. You can follow me on Twitter at Noah

0:35:12.916 --> 0:35:15.356
<v Speaker 1>R Feldman. This is deep background