William Skipworth’s New Hampshire Bulletin article in the June 9 Monitor titled “Warmington an opioid lobbyist?” did a pretty good job historically timing the former executives councilor and now gubernatorial candidate’s involvement in defending Purdue Pharma and defending bad acting doctors at PainCare.
The article focused on her work with Purdue in early 2000 which didn’t make her look good. It then included a legal review defending Cinde Warmington’s involvement by UNH Franklin Pierce law professor Julian Jefferson, and then finally focused on how Warmington is now responding to Ayotte and the Republican party’s renewed attack (it came up two years ago when she lost her bid for the Democratic nomination to Joyce Craig).
The article brought back memories of 25 years ago when I started a 17-year stint as a physician on the NH Board of Medicine. It was the same time that Warmington started testifying to not only the legislature but also the Board of Medicine, often defending her clients who were in trouble with the Board of Medicine.
What Skipworth’s article didn’t mention was the fact of pressure in the late 1990s and early 2000s on physicians to prescribe more, and new narcotics came not only from Purdue and PainCare but also from the public, our legislature and the attorney general’s office. They all were telling us that we were undertreating pain. It’s when we physicians were urged by them to ask our patients to rate their pain 1 out of 10. This all preceded the opioid epidemic almost a decade later.
What I remember most was actually seeing Warmington in action and then wondering how these bad actors (corporations and doctors) got such a good lawyer. She never lied, she always had facts to back up her assertions, answered our questions in a courteous and complete manor. She was really competent and smart. As Professor Jefferson asserted in the article, “Attorneys often represent bad actors because that’s how the system works.”
Speaking of systems, the concept in this country of a fair trial and being represented by a good, competent and hopefully smart lawyer actually preceded our county’s birth. In November 1770, eight months after the Boston Massacre, a young John Adams was hired to defend the British soldiers who shot into the mob crowd. It was not popular at the time since the majority of colonial citizens felt the British were entirely to blame.
Adams, like Warmington, did a good job defending his clients. The soldiers were given light sentences. The population then understood the rules of fairness and also understood that facts and politics are often different. As stated in the article, “Jefferson said the legal world he exist in and politics are ‘two different realms.’” As we all know, Adams went on to be Washington’s vice-president and the president himself.
The last part of the article focused on Warmington’s response to Ayotte’s comments. So far, she seems to have had her spokesperson, Jonathan Levin, address the media on the renewed attack. I’m hoping she will soon confront her accusers directly with the historical context and facts of her work back then and rightfully defend herself from those, who unlike me, have not seen her in action. I’d like to think if she does that, just like Adams did 256 years ago, the public, like then, will come to her defense.
I think those attacking her are scared of her and look at her as someone who could defeat Ayotte in November. She could, because she is capable and smart enough to win. She is also honest and truly cares about our pressing issues, unlike our current legislature and governor.
Nick Perencevich lives in Concord.