NOW FOR
A
CLOSER
LOOK
AT
THE
% ONGOING STAND-OFF
BETWEEN
THE
% DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE
AND
THE
% LEGISLATURE.%WISCONSIN WAS NO
T
AMONG
THE
% MORE
THAN
20
STATES THAT
% REACHED
A
SETTLEMENT
WITH
THE
% OPIOID MANUFACTURER PURDUE
% PHARMA
THIS
WEEK.
% ATTORNEY GENERAL
JOSH KAUL
%
SAYING
WE'RE COMMITTED
TO
% GETTING
JUSTICE
AND
IN
MY
VIEW
% PURDUE'S CURRENT POSITION
% DOESN'T ACHIEVE
THAT.
% IT
COMES
IN
THE
MIDST
OF
AN
% IMPASSE WITH
REPUBLICANS
ON
THE
% JOINT
FINANCE
COMMITTEE
WHETHER
% THEY SHOULD SIGN
% CONFIDENTIALITY
AGREEMENTS
TO
% SEE AND APPROVE
CASE
% RESOLUTIONS UNDER
THE
SO-CALLED
% LAME
DUCK LAWS
LIMITING
KAUL'S
% AUTHORITY.
% THE
CO-CHAIRS
OF
JFC
STATED
% THROUGH
MEDIA
REPORTS
THE % ATTORNEY GENERAL STATED %
WISCONSIN
IS
NOT
ONE
OF
THE
% STATES
AGREEING
TO
SETTLE THE % PURDUE
PHARMA CASE
AT
THIS
TIME.
% WE
HOPE
THOSE
REPORTERS
HAVE
% SIGNED
NON-DISCLOSURE
% AGREEMENTS BECAUSE
THEY'RE
% GETTING CONFIDENTIAL
% INFORMATION FROM
THE
ATTORNEY
% GENERAL THAT
HE
REFUSED TO
% SHARE
WITH
MEMBERS
OF THE
JOINT
% FINANCE COMMITTEE.
% THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL,
THEY
SAY, % SHOULD
STOP
PLAYING
GAMES.% JFC
COMMITTEE
LEADERSHIP
% DECLINED OUR
INVITATION
TO
% APPEAR ON
TONIGHT'S
PROGRAM
AS
% THE
HIGH
STAKES
DISPUTE
% CONTINUES, WE
SAT
DOWN WITH
% ATTORNEY GENERAL KAUL
JUST
% AHEAD
OF
THE ANNOUNCED % SETTLEMENTS
AMONG
OTHER
STATES.
% WE
STARTED
BY
ASKING
ABOUT
THE
% NEED FOR THOSE
SECRECY
% AGREEMENTS.
% >>
WHEN
YOU
ARE
LITIGATING
A % CASE, THERE
IS CERTAIN
% INFORMATION THAT
NEEDS TO
BE
% KEPT
CONFIDENTIAL
IN
A
LOT
OF
% CIRCUMSTANCES
AND
SO TO
PRESENT
% POTENTIAL SETTLEMENTS TO
THE
% LEGISLATURE, WE
REACHED
OUT
AND
% SAID
WE
NEED
TO
REACH
A
PROCESS
% THAT
WILL
ALLOW
US
TO
DISCUSS
% THESE
MATTERS
CONFIDENTIALLY SO % THE STATE'S
INTEREST
AND
THE
% INTEREST OF
TAXPAYERS
ISN'T
% UNDERMINED BY
HAVING
% CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION MADE %
PUBLIC AND AVAILABLE
TO
THE % OTHER
SIDE
IN
LITIGATION.
% WE'VE
OFFERED
A
COUPLE
OPTIONS
% BUT
THE
PRIMARY
ONE
WE
OFFERED
% A
CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT FOR
% THE LEGISLATURE TO
SIGN
AND
% THEY
HAVE
DECLINED TO
SIGN
THAT
% AND
THE PROBLEM
IS
THE
% SOLUTIONS
THEY
HAVE
OFFERED % DON'T
ACTUALLY
PROTECT
% CONFIDENTIALITY.
% SO
WE
NEED
THEM TO
FIGURE
OUT
% SOME SORT OF
SOLUTION TO
THIS
% MESS
THAT THEY'VE
CREATED
SO
% THAT
WE
CAN
MOVE
FORWARD
WITH % RESOLUTIONS FOR THE
STATE.
% >>
ONE
OF THOSE
SOLUTIONS
THAT
% THEY OFFERED A
COUPLE OF WEEKS % AGO
WAS
TO
HAVE
A
LAWYER
SIGN % IT
ON THEIR
BEHALF.% IS
THAT
STILL WHAT
THEY'RE
% TALKING ABOUT?
% >>
IT IS
NOT CLEAR
TO
ME WHAT % THEY'RE
TALKING
ABOUT
NOW.
% THEY'VE OFFERED
A
COUPLE
% SOLUTIONS
THAT
THEY SAID
WOULD
% MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY.%FI
RST THEY
SAID
THEY WOULD GO
% INTO
CLOSED
SESSION.
% THE
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE
% BUREAU
SAYS IT
DOESN'T
PROTECT
% CONFIDENTIALITY.%THEY WOULD
HAVE
A LAWYER SIGN
A
% CONFIDENTIALITY
AGREEMENT.
% AGAIN
THE
LEGISLATIVE
REFERENCE
% BUREAU SAID
IT DOESN'T
BIND
% INDIVIDUAL LEGISLATORS.%THEY
HAVEN'T
COME
UP
WITH % OPTIONS
TO
MAINTAIN
% CONFIDENTIALITY.%THEY
GAVE
THEMSELVES
THIS
% SIGNIFICANT POWER
BUT
THEY NOW
% NEED
TO
TAKE ON
THE
% RESPONSIBILITY THAT COMES WITH
% THE
POWER
OR NEED TO
CHANGE
THE
% LAW.
% >>
THE
SENATE
MAJORITY
LEADER % SCOTT
FITZGERALD
SAID
THIS.
% THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
ALREADY % KNOWS
OF
NUMEROUS
WAYS
HE
CAN % PRESENT
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT
% INFORMATION
TO
THE
JOINT
% FINANCE COMMITTEE
AND
HE
% CONTINUES TO
DRAG
HIS
FEET.% HE CONTINUES
TO
SAY
HE
CAN
WORK % WITH US OR
BE PART
OF THE
% PROBLEM.%WHAT
IS YOUR
RESPONSE
TO
THAT?
% >>
WELL, HE
IS ABSOLUTELY
WRONG
% ABOUT
THAT.
% AS WE JUST
TALKED
ABOUT
THERE
% ARE
OPTIONS
THAT THEY PRESENTED
% THAT
DON'T
WORK.
% WE
HAVE PRESENTED
A
WORKABLE
% OPTION.%THIS
IS
A REALLY
BAD
SITUATION
% AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE
% BEST OF
IT.
% FOR
MONTHS
WE'VE
TRIED
TO WORK
% WITH
THE
LEGISLATURE.
% SO
FAR
THEY
HAVEN'T BEEN % WILLING
TO TAKE
ON
THE % RESPONSIBILITY THEY'VE GIVEN
% THEMSELVES.%>> YOU
SAY
HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS
% OF DOLLARS COULD
BE AT
STAKE.
% HOW
SO?
% >>
THE
STATE
IS
INVOLVED
IN % SETTLING
LOTS
OF
LITIGATION.
% THERE ARE
CASES
THAT
HAVE
% SIGNIFICANT DOLLAR
VALUES
AT % STAKE.
% OVER
TIME
IF
THIS PROBLEM
IS
N'T % RESOLVED, THERE IS
GOING
TO
BE
% SIGNIFICANT
FINANCIAL % CONSEQUENCES
FOR
THE
STATE.
% IF
WE
HAVE
CASES,
FOR
EXAMPLE,
% MULTI-STATE
CASE WHERE
MANY
% STATES JOIN
IN
A
SETTLEMENT BUT % WE AREN'T ABLE
TO
BE
PART
OF
% THAT
SETTLEMENT
BECAUSE
OUR
% JOINT
FINANCE
COMMITTEE
CAN'T
% GET
ITS
ACT
TOGETHER AND
FIGURE
% OUT
HOW
TO
REVIEW
SETTLEMENTS, % IT'S
THE TAXPAYERS
IN
WISCONSIN % WHO WILL
BE
HARMED BY
THAT
AND
% IT WILL
BE
HARDER
TO
GET
% JUSTICE
WHEN
CONSUMERS
ARE
% DEFRAUDED
BY
SOMEBODY
AND
WE
% BROUGHT A
CONSUMER
PROTECTION
% ACTION
OR
IF
A
POLLUTEOR
% COMMITS AN ENVIRONMENTAL
% VIOLATION WE'LL
HAVE
A
HARDER
% TIME RESOLVING
THOSE
CASES
% BECAUSE THE
JOINT
FINANCE
%
COMMITTEE HAS CREATED
THIS
% SITUATION.
% >>
WHAT'S
THE
STATUS
OF THE
% PURDUE
PHARMA
CASE?
% >>
I
CAN
ONLY
COMMENT GENERALLY
% ON
PENDING
LITIGATION.
% WE
HAVE
BROUGHT
SUIT
AGAINST
% TWO
PURDUE
PHARMA
ENTITY
AND
% RICHARD
SACKLER
THE FORMER
% PRESIDENT AND
CO-CHAIR
OF
THE
% BOARD
OF
PURDUE
PHARMA
AND
% JOINED
A
MULTI-STATE % INVESTIGATION
INTO
OPIOID
% MANUFACTURERS.
% MY
PREDECESSOR
JOINED
% MULTI-STATE INVESTIGATIONS
INTO
% DISTRIBUTORS
AND WE'RE
% COMMITTED TO
RECOVERING TO THE
% FULLEST
EXTENT
WE
CAN
ON BEHALF
% OF
WISCONSINITES
SO WE
CAN
% START
PUTTING
THOSE
RESOURCES
% TO
ADDRESS
THE EPIDEMIC
TO
% THINGS
LIKE
TREATMENT AND % PREVENTION
AND
ENFORCEMENT.
% >>
WERE
EARLIER SETTLEMENT
% TALKS IN
CONNECTION
WITH
THAT % CASE OR
THOSE
CASES
PART
OF
% WHAT
BROUGHT YOU BEFORE
JOINT
% FINANCE SAYING
YOU HAD AN
% URGENT MATTER?
% >>
I CAN'T COMMENT
ON
THE % SPECIFICS
OF THAT
NEGOTIATION.
% BUT
WHAT
I
CAN
SAY
IS THAT
ANY % CASE
WHERE
THERE
ARE
URGENT % SETTLEMENT TALKS COULD
LEAD
TO
% A
SITUATION
WHERE
WE MIGHT
NEED
% A
DECISION
VERY
QUICKLY
FROM % THE
JOINT
FINANCE
COMMITTEE.% SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO
MAKE
A
% DECISION IN A
LIMITED
WINDOW
% AND
THE JOINT FINANCE COMMITTEE % NEEDS
TO
HAVE
A
PROCESS
IN
% PLACE
OR THE
STATE
IS
GOING
TO
% BE
AT
RISK
AT
LAONGZ
OUT
ON
% BEING
PART OF
A
LARGE % SETTLEMENT.
% >> WHAT WOULD
IT
MEAN
IF
THE
% MANUFACTURER
OF
OXYCONTIN
% DECLARED BANKRUPTCY?
% >>
IF
THERE IS
BANKRUPTCY
% DECLARED
WISCONSIN
AND
A
NUMBER % OF OTHER
STATES,
I'M
CONFIDENT
% A
NUMBER OF
OTHER
STATES
WILL
% CONTINUE
TO
PURSUE
THEIR
CLAIMS
% BOTH AGAINST
THE
BANKRUPTCY
% ESTATE.%WE
ALSO
HAVE A
CLAIM
AGAINST % ONE
OF
THE
MEMBERS
OF
THE
% SACKLER FAMILY
AND THOSE
CLAIMS
% WILL
BE
CLAIMS
THAT WE
CONTINUE
% TO
PURSUE
EITHER
IN A
% BANKRUPTCY FORUM
OR
IN
THE FORM % WHERE
THEY
CURRENTLY
ARE.
% >>
IN
TERMS
OF
THE
SITUATION
% WITH
THE
JOINT
FINANCE
% COMMITTEE, IF
JUSTICE
HAS
TO
% TRY
CASES
RATHER
THAN
SETTLE
% THEM,
IS
YOUR
OFFICE
PREPARED
% TO
DO THAT IN
EVERY
INSTANCE?
% >>
WE'RE
PREPARED TO
TRY THE
% CASES WE'VE
BROUGHT
BUT
A
GOOD
% EXAMPLE
OF
HOW THIS
NEW % PROCEDURE
THAT
HAS
BEEN
PUT
IN % PLACE HARMS
WISCONSINITES
% BECAUSE WE HAVE
LIMITED
% RESOURCES
AT
THE
DEPARTMENT OF
% JUSTICE AND
WE
NEED
TO
MAKE
% SURE
WE'RE
ALLOCATING
THOSE % RESOURCES AS
EFFECTIVELY
AS
% POSSIBLE.
% ONE
WAY
IS
BY
SETTLING
SOME
% CASES
SO
THAT
THE
RESOURCES
WE % DO
HAVE
AREN'T
USED
IN
LARGE % VOLUME
ON SINGLE
CASES.
% BUT
RATHER
WE
CAN
MAKE
SURE
% WE'RE GETTING JUSTICE IN A
LOT % MORE CASES.
% IF
NOT
WE
NEED
TO CONSIDER
THE
% POSSIBILITY THAT
MANY
MORE % CASES ARE
GOING
TO
TRIAL.
% THAT'S
GOING TO
IMPACT THE
% NUMBER
OF
CASES WE
CAN
BRING
% AND
THE
NUMBER
OF
PEOPLE
ARE % ABLE TO
GET
JUSTICE.
% >>
SOME DANGER
OF WORSE
% OUTCOMES
IF YOU
GO
TO
TRIAL
% RATHER
THAN ENTER
INTO
A % SETTLEMENT?
% >>
ABSOLUTELY.% THE REASON
YOU
ENTER
INTO
A
% SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS
YOU
% IT'S
A
FAIR RESOLUTION
OF
A
% CASE.
% RISK
COMES
WITH
PROCEEDING TO % TRIAL.
% YOU
MIGHT LOSE
A
CASE
AND
YOU
% HAVE
TO
SPEND
RESOURCES THAT % YOU
WOULDN'T OTHERWISE HAVE
TO
% SPEND.
% >>
ARE
YOU
PUSHING
THIS
BECAUSE
% YOU
JUST
DON'T
APPROVE OF
THIS
% LAW
OR
IS
IT
A PARTISAN
% SITUATION
FOR
YOU?
% >>
WE
BEGAN
IN
FEBRUARY
TRYING
% TO
REACH
AN AGREEMENT
WITH
THE
% CO-CHAIRS
OF
THE JOINT
FINANCE
% COMMITTEE TO TRY
TO
PUT
IN
% PLACE
A
PROCESS
THAT
WOULD
% ALLOW US
TO RESOLVE
CASES.
% THIS
IS
NOT
A
GOOD
SITUATION
NO
% MATTER WHAT
PROCESS WE
PUT
IN
% PLACE.
% BUT
WE'RE
TRYING
TO
MAKE
IT
% WORK
BECAUSE
MY
INTEREST
IS
IN
% GETTING
THE
BEST
OUTCOME
% POSSIBLE
FOR WISCONSINITES
IN
% THESE
CASES.
% UNFORTUNATELY WE
HAVEN'T
BEEN
% ABLE
TO
REACH
AGREEMENT
WITH % THE
JOINT
FINANCE
COMMITTEE.
% THEY
KEEP
INSISTING
ON % SOLUTIONS
THAT
DON'T
WORK.
% AND THEY'VE
REFUSED
TO TAKE
ON
% THE
RESPONSIBILITY
OF
% MAINTAINING THE CONFIDENTIALITY
% OF
CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS.% SO WHILE
I
WOULD
LIKE
TO SEE
% THIS
LAW
OVERTURNED, WE'RE % DOING OUR
BEST
TO
MAKE
IT
WORK
% AND
WE UNFORTUNATELY HAVEN'T
% HAD
COOPERATION
FROM
THE JOINT
% FINANCE COMMITTEE
TO MAKE
THAT % A REALITY.
% >>
AGAIN,
THE
REPUBLICAN
% CO-CHAIR