top of page

Speaking with Congressman Leonard Lance about consumer fairness and the opioid epidemic


Republican Congressman Leonard Lance of New Jersey’s Seventh Congressional District is currently serving his fifth term in Congress with constituents from the entirety of Hunterdon County as well as parts of Union, Somerset, Morris, Warren and Essex Counties. As an intern in his District of Columbia office, I sat down to interview him in December on subjects that reflect his Congressional agenda as well as his career as a lawyer.

Congressman Lance, as a four-term Congressman, you have vast experience from your time as a member of the New Jersey General Assembly and as Minority Leader of the New Jersey Senate, as well as assistant counsel for county and municipal matters to Governor Thomas Kean for county and municipal matters. How can you help future law students? What advice can you give to future lawyers?

This is an exciting time to study law because there are so many issues that are related to the law and particularly here in Washington because of the vacancy in the Supreme Court. I think this will be an exciting time to analyze the appointment to be made by the new president regarding the vacancy on the Supreme Court and whether the Senate will advise and consent to that appointment. If this occurs, it will be interesting to see what direction the court will take with a full complement of justices being seated.

How do you think of your municipal work compared to what you do today?

I think it is important to have an understanding of all levels of government; municipal and county government is important to New Jersey, we have more municipalities per capita than any other state in the nation. New Jersey is very much a home rule state, when I worked for Governor Kean in the 1980s, my various concentrations on his legal staff included county and municipal government and I think it was an important portfolio because local government is probably more important in New Jersey than it is in most states across the country. It was an honor for me to work for Governor Kean’s office. He had a wonderful legal office with three Chief Counsel; the late Cary Edwards who later became Attorney General of New Jersey, Michael Cole who was a brilliant lawyer, and Deborah Poritz was his last Chief Counsel, who went on in the 1990s to be Governor Whitman’s Attorney General and was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New Jersey. I had the privilege of working with all three of these Chief Counsel during Governor Kean’s term.

I want to congratulate you and your staff on the passage of this act on the Senate floor. My understanding is the Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016 seeks to improve the invalidity of impeding on an individual or consumer’s reviews, making a “provision of a form contract void from the inception,” when an individual engages in negative public reviews to ensure they are not penalized.

Can you further interpret the purpose of the Consumer Review Fairness Act and does this work in tandem with the Consumer Review Freedom Act of 2015?

Certainly, there is a correlation with the 2015 act. The reason I became involved with this issue is that I think you should be able to post online honest assessments of your consumer experience if you purchase a product or service. For example, dining at a restaurant or hiring an orchestra for a wedding. Often times, there seems to be in very small print a provision that you are not allowed to say something bad about the experience you have had as a consumer and I think that it is violative of freedom speech. The aim of the legislation is to permit the consuming public, truthfully, to give their opinions about the services they have purchased.

Does this fall under our First Amendment? And why you have fought for this ‘freedom of expression’ issue?

Certainly, this legislation is consistent with the First Amendment. Perhaps, non-disparagement clauses might be violative of the First Amendment, but certainly doing away with non-disparagement clauses is consistent, I believe, with the purposes of the First Amendment.

Is it true that a former Congressional intern brought this act to your attention?

One of our colleagues on the staff confronted this situation, when he and his fiancée were looking to contract for part of their wedding preparations.

I hope I might get a pen from the president’s signing, but that’s yet to be determined. President Obama is leaving office and it is my honor to be the sponsor of one of the last pieces of legislation that he will have the opportunity to sign it, and I trust and expect that he will sign it into law.

Since this interview, President Obama signed the law on December 14.

The Opioid Review Modernization Act of 2016 intends to improve the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by requiring special approval for opioid drug application to a special advisory committee such as labeling for pediatric use and educational programs informing opioid prescribers.

We’re in an opioid epidemic right now. The U. S. Department of Health and Human Services reports that the nation is in the midst of an unprecedented opioid epidemic, and in 2014 over 150,000 people died of an overdose. Can you provide us with further information regarding the Opioid Review Modernization Act? What encouraged you to co-sponsor this act with Rep. Maloney (NY-18) when it was introduced in April? Can you elaborate on that opioid crisis in America and how it affects communities?

Congress has passed a series of pieces of legislation regarding opioid abuse, more than a dozen pieces of legislation. Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney was the primary sponsor of this component piece that says that the medical community has to look at other options that are not ultimately addictive in prescribing medicines. I was pleased to be the Republican cosponsor; this demonstrates how bipartisan the Energy and Commerce Committee is. We are without a doubt the most bipartisan committee on Capitol Hill. More bills come out of Energy and Commerce and reach the floor of the House than any other committee and more bills ultimately become law from the Energy and Commerce Committee than any other committee in the House or the Senate. For this legislation to move, there had to be Republican participation because Republicans control the House at the moment. I was pleased to work with my colleague, Sean Patrick Maloney, who represents the district North of New York City up the Hudson River. His district and my district are similar. Congress is united in our belief that we have to do a better job regarding the opioid abuse crisis in this country-- a crisis that has come on the scene relatively rapidly. I do not think we were discussing this certainly not ten years ago, maybe not even five years ago.

Since the State of New Jersey is one of the biggest pharmaceutical employers in the country, what pressure do you feel to acquiesce to their commercialization of narcotic opioids?

I try to work responsibly with the pharmaceutical industry and I believe that they will be responsible about this issue. I have argued that the district I serve is the medicine chest of the country and indeed one of the medicine chests of the world. I view our pharmaceutical industry in the context of competitors across the globe. I think it is important to maintain a strong and vibrant pharmaceutical industry in the United States. My title is representative, technically, and I try to represent the best interest of the district I serve. Many of the employees in the district are employed in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries so I try to be an advocate for those industries because of the heavy presence they have in our part of the world.

What information should the Senate’s Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions be notified during their review of the Opioid Review Modernization Act, before it votes on the matter?

I would hope they would pass what we have sent them. The Senate operates slightly differently than the House. I defer to the Senate into its internal deliberations, but I would hope the legislation would be sent to the Senate, since we have considered it responsibly that legislation could become law.

How in the past did you come about the opioid crisis?

I have had constituents that have indicated that this is a challenge for their families personally. Thank God, to my knowledge, that no one in my family has suffered from a drug addiction, but it does affect those in all walks of life and includes constituents I serve as well as other constituencies in more urban New Jersey. This is a crisis that exists in suburban and rural New Jersey and and in suburban and rural United States, as it does in more rural areas.

Can you share with us any other legislation you are passionate about and what bills you’d like to see enacted in your next term?

I am honored to be elected to a fifth term and I am honored to continue to serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee. I think it is the place where I can be the most effective and I have been working on legislation known as Modern Cures which was not contained in the final version of the 21st Century Cures Act. The President has indicated that he will sign the bill, once the Senate passes it, the House has passed a final version this week. A component piece, Modern Cures did not make the final configuration of the bill that is going to the President’s desk. Modern Cures is a bill that will try to enhance medicines for rare diseases and extend the period of exclusivity, when drug companies do the investigative work to bring to market medicines for rare diseases. I have in my office here in Washington, virtually weekly, parents of children who have rare diseases and quite a few Americans have rare diseases. There is a tremendous unmet need regarding medicines for rare diseases. Certainly in the next term, I will be working on Modern Cures which is to accelerate in a responsible way recognizing that safety is always first and the development of medicines. There are no medicines at all at the moment.

Do you think this is in part due to your leadership on the Rare Disease Caucus?

I became the Republican chair of the Rare Disease Caucus, when Rep. Upton of Michigan gave up that responsibility to assume a much greater responsibility as Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. I work in a bipartisan capacity with Congressman Crowley (NY-14) of Queens County, the Democratic chair on issues of Rare Diseases. Every week in my office, I see the courage of those with rare diseases or those who have other family members with rare diseases.

On behalf of The George Washington University Justice Journal, I would like to thank you for your time today, heightening awareness of the opioid crisis, taking a stance on consumer fairness, and sharing your expertise as a lawyer and congressman.

Good luck to the Justice Journal. George Washington is a great university, and it has provided many leaders of this country in the past, and I am sure it will continue to do so.

Interview Date: December 1, 2016

bottom of page