Executive Director, Bruce Iwasaki

Who Wants to be President?

October, 2003

In the last week a couple of people -- national legal services leaders insisting they were serious -- have asked me whether I was interested in being considered for the presidency of the Legal Services Corporation.

It is flattering to be asked, but on further reflection (and laughter), it suggests a serious problem. (By the way, I am not interested, and, as I explain, lack what I think the job requires.)

How secure is the national commitment to legal services for the poor? I would say we have become adept at (or accustomed to) looking at a one-quarter filled glass from under the table and calling it half-full. Yes, it could be worse. We could have a hammer and tongs war in Congress as in 1995; we could have a Reagan-LSC board as in 1982 * both eras when a third of federal funding was cut. And although in real dollar terms federal funding is half of what it was in 1981, and although the U.S. lags far behind other industrial democracies in its funding for legal aid, in recent years, even in a Bush Administration with Republican control of both Houses, LSC funding has remained stable, and even inched up.

Dual role

But the ballooning federal budget deficit * in large part caused by massive tax cut gifts to the wealthiest Americans * will put pressure on all domestic programs in the coming years. And while the public support for legal access for low-income people is surprisingly strong, almost no one can name the program. Equal access to justice is neither a campaign issue nor at the forefront of most voters' minds.

I think a new LSC president can help change that. The position has never been a bully pulpit, but it needs to be. Much the way C. Everett Koop became a nationally recognized figure as Surgeon General, one can imagine -- and hope for -- an LSC president that casts a bright light on the inequality of our civil justice system and rallies a movement for more federal funding, more state funding, more corporate and foundation support, more law school commitment, and more pro bono.

An activist LSC president would educate the American people about our two-tier system, and how it not only puts the lie to our ideals and beliefs, it undermines the civic engagement a healthy democracy requires. We at LAFLA are so familiar with how our clients lack access to the justice system that we assume this perception is widely held. Not so. Justice Earl Johnson, the keenest student of this issue in the country, points out that most Americans believe that the Constitution guarantees a right to a lawyer in civil cases (as is the case in most other Western democracies).

This slapped me in the head a few weeks ago when I met Amy Brenneman, our Access to Justice honoree at last week's dinner. In real life, her mother is a judge. Her father is a lawyer. She plays a judge on "Judging Amy." She went to Harvard. Yet as we were chatting, I learned that she was unaware that there is no constitutional right to a lawyer in civil cases. When we talked about it, we thought it may have to do with all those cop shows on television where (again, in contrast to real life) every suspect gets a Minanda warning. (Brenneman also played in "NYPD Blue.") And in all of the law shows on television, even the ones that relate to a legal aid office, of course, everyone has a lawyer. They are shows about lawyers, not about clients.

Persuading skeptics

So there is a huge need for a new LSC President to reinvigorate the legal services movement. It should be obvious, though, that this will be difficult. There are plenty of interests -- growers, chambers of commerce, landlord lobbies, you can think of others -- who will not go along. And they make bigger campaign contributions than anyone you know.

This is important because the Legal Services Corporation is a child of Congress, and subject to all the whims of the political process. Therefore, some argue, rather than seeking to rally a movement, LSC should pitch itself to the mainstream of both parties, urge gradual increases, go along with and enforce vigorously the restrictions, and strive to shed the image of being a haven for lefties and social engineers. This argument has recent success to support it. John McKay, a moderate Republican LSC president, did an excellent job making equal justice a bipartisan issue, winning over Republican moderates, and isolating the right wing to the point that, in contrast to the years from 1996 to 1999, no one is talking about cutting LSC funds in half on a "glide path to elimination."

Too much accommodation, though, risks gutting the heart out of the reason we exist. Counsel and advice and hotlines have their place, but the best programs in the country -- including LAFLA -- are committed to changing the environment for clients through affirmative litigation, policy advocacy, and partnerships with the community. The national agenda should emphasize that equal access to justice means that lawyers for the poor have at their disposal all of the procedural tools of any lawyer with a paying client.

For the immediate future, a new LSC president must be acceptable to an often querulous Congress, but also have the trust of the field. A tough job. But an amazingly important one. Just imagine a modest and achievable one-quarter increase in federal funding -- how many hundreds of thousands more low income people all over the country could be served with that.

LAFLA's leadership

One should be concerned, therefore, that my name is even on anyone's short list. It means we have not yet developed the pool of politicians, prominent lawyers, and judges who have served on ABA or State Bar equal justice committees or pro bono advocacy organizations and could plausibly step into the national spotlight. Someone who can have the ear of a Domenici in the Senate, and deal toe to toe with DeLay in the House. And explain to Congress why the private money restriction is unfair, secure more funding in a time of deficits, and fend off the Inspector General's efforts to embarrass legal services with audits.

The new LSC board will be hiring a new president and inspector general in the coming months. The new officers and their staffs will implement policies that could affect our work for clients for the next decade. One thing is different from a few years ago: LAFLA is far more sophisticated. We don't merely observe what happens in Washington. Rather, we are engaged with and leaders in the national equal justice delivery system. LAFLA is a national leader in VAWA work, housing advocacy, trafficking training, even LSC compliance. We are known for creativity in community economic development, strategic planning, and entrepreneurial work. We have, in my humble opinion, the best web page, best video and best annual report in the country.

By being outstanding, we can help a new LSC president tell our clients' stories, persuade Congress, and thus, help strengthen legal services nationwide. By being exemplary, LAFLA can help LSC be more effective. No need to go to Washington.

BGI