Contact
Subscribe
Nov 29, 2011 
Equal Access to Justice Act amendment raises questions, concern – Yreka, CA – Siskiyou Daily News
Equal Access to Justice Act amendment raises questions, concern
By John Bowman
Siskiyou Daily News
November 29, 2011
Yreka, Calif. — On Nov. 17 the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary approved HR 1996 – The Government Legislative Savings Act – by a 19-14 vote. The bill, if passed by both houses of Congress, would amend the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which was originally passed in 1980 to eliminate disincentives for people to fight illegal governmental actions by allowing successful plaintiffs to be reimbursed for their legal expenses.
The new bill would enact five substantial amendments to the EAJA. It:
• Requires that plaintiffs must show a “direct and personal monetary interest” in the case;
• Eliminates reimbursement of fees for cases argued by pro bono legal representation;
• Establishes new limitations on legal fee rates and amounts;
• Establishes a net-worth limitation for nonprofit or charitable organizations; and
• Requires public reporting of all EAJA awards and case details, and initiates a study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to assess past EAJA awards.
The bill’s proponents say it will stop what they believe is a trend of environmental groups’ exploitation of the EAJA for financial gain.
A major supporter of the amendment, Wyoming attorney Karen Budd-Falon, said in a June press release, “Like so many other laws in this country, the original idea of the federal government reimbursing individuals and small businesses who have to fight against overreaching bureaucracy is noble. But like many original ideas, over the years EAJA and the payment of attorney fees out of the Judgment Fund on Endangered Species Act and other litigation has been distorted beyond recognition.”
But senior citizen groups, consumer advocacy groups and other opponents say the amendment to the 31-year-old law will affect far more than just environmental groups.
Visiting Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown University Law Center Brian Wolfman recently testified before the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives regarding the proposed legislation.
“H.R. 1996 would amend the EAJA in ways that would harm the American public and undermine the enforcement of laws meant to advance our health, safety and welfare,” Wolfman told the committee. “In short … it would eviscerate a law intended to protect Americans when they face unreasonable action by the federal government.”
Local attorney Michael Thamer said he believes that HR 1996 will do more harm than good.
“It is a mistake to believe that the proposed legislation will only limit environmental group’s ability to bring actions,” Thamer said. “I have litigated many claims against governmental agencies in state and federal courts over the past 30 years, including actions on behalf of the elderly, minors and the economically disadvantaged, and HR 1996 will significantly harm their ability to protect their rights in the future.”
Thamer added, “HR 1996 would gut equal access to justice, including access by our country’s elderly and veteran populations by greatly limiting their ability to retain legal counsel.”
Possible impact on veterans
Mike Murphy, director of the National Association of County Veterans Service Officers, told the Daily News that veterans do file suit against the federal government to dispute veterans’ benefit judgements and may seek EAJA reimbursement, but Murphy feels that this particular legislation is a republican attempt to stop environmental groups.
“It’s another one of those political battles,” Murphy said. “And I feel like veterans’ issues are not partisan.”
It is impossible to know the true breakdown of EAJA awards to specific groups or individuals because in 1994 congress eliminated the reporting requirement for these funds.
However, in 1998 the GAO completed a study of the awards reported from 1982-1994.
According to that report, “in fiscal year 1982 through fiscal year 1994, more than 6,200 applicants were awarded about $34 million. Of the $34 million, applications involving the Social Security Administration (SSA) accounted for at least 83 percent of the claims granted and 48 percent of the amounts awarded.”
The report also found that, “In fiscal year 1994, the Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Veterans Affairs cases together accounted for about 98 percent of the applications granted and 87 percent of the dollars paid.”
On Nov. 16 a coalition of advocacy groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, National Senior Citizens Law Center, National Employment Lawyers Association, National Fair Housing Alliance and several environmental groups sent a letter to congress opposing HR 1996.
“For three decades veterans, seniors, the disabled, small businesses, and nonprofit groups from across the ideological spectrum have relied on EAJA to challenge illegal government actions,” the letter states. “H.R. 1996 would … make the federal government less accountable by hindering the public’s ability to challenge government abuses.”
PNP comment: Non-Government Organizations, especially environmental advocates, have abused the system for years receiving, what amounts to “pay-offs” from the government’s tax payers. Wyoming Attorney Karen Budd-Falen has exposed the corruption. — Editor Liz Bowen
No Comments 