Resolving the Massachusetts Paradox

Part 7: Commitment, for the long run

I think resolving the Massachusetts Paradox is the most important near- and long-term goal that biopharma advocacy can set itself to. I’m committed to this campaign. 

As a scientist and investor but also just being a human being with family, friends, and colleagues I care about, I want to see innovation continue. There’s so much we can do if we preserve a policy framework that inspires the world’s investors to keep biotech in their portfolios. 

If we can’t get Massachusetts voters to rate biopharma highly and support policies that make innovation possible (i.e., solve affordability with insurance reform to lower out-of-pocket costs, not price controls), then how can we invest with confidence? The sky isn’t falling right now. The point is to make sure it doesn’t ever fall.

When we invest in a preclinical program in 2025, we’re betting there won’t be price controls at any point before at least 2045, after which we assume our drug will go generic anyways. Hated as much as our industry is (ranked dead last!), and given the rate at which each successful drug launch erodes the public’s tolerance, can anyone be confident that there won’t be worse price controls than the pill penalty over the next twenty years unless we fight like hell to win the public’s trust and love?

And that starts at home. We have to solve the Massachusetts Paradox. Once we do that and fuel a sustained pro-innovation marketing effort to keep the public onside, we can have confidence in sound policy for decades into the future.

MA-rketing is a prudent insurance policy against a clear and growing tail risk of anti-innovation policy. It’s existential for our industry and vital for our state. 

I hope you see a role for yourself in this. Join me, RA Capital, No Patient Left Behind, and others who have signed on below to make the MA-rketing Coalition a reality. Sign up for next steps here.