Harry Markopolos, the Madoff whistleblower, has written a book, “No One Would Listen.” (Put up in the Amazon widget in the sidebar).
What makes someone a whistleblower?
Mr. Markopolos’ congressional testimony will go down in history – (e.g., here’s a clip, about 5 minutes, with the noted Harvard Law grad from the Disneyland District, Rep. Alan Grayson)
This C-Span testimony (yes, political theater), riveted the country because here’s “some guy” who was staring down the entire financial services industry and regulators. Make no mistake, Markopolos = Hero
But: Two things on altruism and one thing on his complaints about the health care industry.
First, on altruism: What is it that makes people whistleblowers at such great self-expense?
1. Mr. Markopolos was originally utilitarian, starting the Madoff investigation, as a fund manager, to prove to his boss Madoff’s returns were unreproducible. But later, he gathered steam despite personal and professional sacrifice.This may be in part similarly utilitarian, after all, freedom is just another word for nothin’ left to lose, when you’re ratting out Wall Street, to paraphrase a song . What is it when self interest reaches the threshold so that altruism breaks through?
2. Mr. Markopolos, in bringing down Madoff, helped the drug cartels and mobsters. This much is admitted (it’s in the C-Span testimony at: 01:48:23, 02:22:09 , and 02:22:09, just type “Russian” in the search box). Mr. Markopolos admitted that he feared the mob, and took the position, “hey, by bringing down Madoff, I’m helping you, don’t kill me. .. “) So, is being altruistic even incidentally on behalf of the drug cartels and mafiosi still real altruism? Real life is never that clear.
3. Here’s where I differ from Mr. Markopolos. From Huffpo:
Markopolos reveals the multitude of other cases he’s working on, some of which involve health care fraud (he says the health care industry “makes Wall Street look honest”):
Truthfully, my career aspiration is to prove that a drug with more than a billion dollars in annual sales is actually killing Americans and citizens across the globe, that in the clinical trials the dangers of this drug were revealed, and that the executives knew about the dangers and went ahead and marketed it anyway. I’ve been working on this case for a few years now without much success, but I hope someday I’ll be able to find a key witness and get this case filed with the Department of Justice.
Now, the executive suites in pharma are as dysfunctional as they come, make no mistake. They make the Real Housewives look like prudence personified. But, most of the $BB drugs out there were conceived before the current executive suites were in power. The current exec. suites are just riding the gravy train, trying to not make any decisions that could get themselves fired.
But the trouble with complaining about biopharma companies is that in the US the science is really good. The thing is, especially with biologicals, the mode of action is pretty well figured out, maybe not totally, but there’s a rationale. This isn’t just some miracle dust that no one know how things work. The drug binds the receptor, or inhibits a pathway or something like that.
Usually the drug isn’t toxic or poisonous, but rather the label is too broad or off-base. Even Vioxx, imo, was a good drug for those who needed it, it just should have been prescribed more narrowly. That, again, imo, was because the management layer had misguided compensation and a culture of being punished for bearing bad news. Even off-label promotion may be hugely criminal, but, most off-label uses are not only fine, but actually needed by patients. A drug company that takes a short cut getting a limited approval — so they don’t run out of money — and then gets the drug out in the clinic — should be permitted to do post-marketing surveillance, doctor or even patient reporting for off-label uses.
Again, executive suite, insurance company reimbursements in cahoots, boards of directors, Mr. Markopolos, sic’ em. For the drugs, let the plaintiffs’ lawyers take care of this, they have the machinery in place.
I’d like to see Mr. Markopolos bring to the DoJ enough stuff to sue the Federal Reserve + investment banks for RICO. Does the Fed have immunity? Or, call credit default swaps illegal gaming, get with the Native Americans and sue for unfair competition. (Is there a law that exempts credit default swaps from being gambling?) Ech, could go on forever about that.
And, Mr. Markopolos, here’s the real secret. Come closer to the screen, I’ll whisper it:
Drugs are more valuable to a company’s stock when they’re in the pipeline. Everyone sells on launch.
This blog has covered whistle blowers, like
Book review: David Einhorn’s “Fooling Some of the People All of the Time: A Long Short Story”
Workplace bullying outed: Paul, Hastings is out-lawyered by the lawyer they just fired
(See a list at: Roundup: Neurological Correlates posts on politics, economics and culture, links all in one place)
Comments