Legal Services for the Poor

I was astounded to read Gary Bauer’s ideological attack on the Legal Services Corp. (Commentary, Nov. 29). In California Rural Legal Assistance’s Santa Maria office (1984-88), my caseload consisted of farm workers living in unspeakable conditions trying to get paid for their work, senior citizens ripped off by scam artists, disabled people trying to understand the SSI system and many other individuals with a variety of legal problems. The only thing they had in common was being too poor to hire a lawyer.

Anti-family? Expanding welfare dependency? Promoting divorce? Assisting the “homosexual political agenda”? Nonsense! The Legal Services Corp. simply ensures that justice under the law is a reality for all.

DAVID P. KOPPELMAN

Los Angeles

*

* Bauer’s assault on the Legal Services Corp. is a patchwork of artfully phrased distortions and convenient omissions intended to mislead the public about legal aid programs for the poor. The Legal Services Corp. makes grants directly to 323 locally controlled programs operating over 1,200 neighborhood law offices nationally. The programs benefit more than 5 million individuals annually, most of whom are poor children. Ninety-four percent of nearly 1.7 million cases closed last year, and to which Bauer made no reference, are “routine” civil matters--obtaining child support from absent parents, efforts to save small family farms and to aid disaster victims, such as those who suffered through the Oklahoma City bombing. A great many legal aid cases help victims, including children, escape abuse and violence in the home. We hardly apologize for our efforts to help individuals leave dangerous living situations. Yet Bauer terms legal services “anti-family,” choosing to ignore the tens of thousands of cases brought to resolve unemployment disputes or prevent dispossession of a house or car. In many instances such efforts keep poor families intact and from falling into dependency.

Before the 1974 inception of legal aid, the poor had little or no access to legal assistance. Even now, studies show that only 20% of the need for free legal help is fulfilled. Legal Services Corp. sends 97% percent of its total budget--$400 million in 1995--to the field. The Washington office manages administrative matters on the remaining 3% of the money, a level of efficiency that, even Bauer would have to admit, is unmatched by many government and private organizations.

ALEXANDER D. FORGER

President, Legal Services Corp.

Washington

*

* The LSC is no more responsible for rulings obtained than are private attorneys who achieve the same legal results for wealthier clients. Judges, acting on the basis of law and precedent, decided or made possible the outcomes that Bauer decries and blames on the LSC. If we don’t like the social results of some litigation, we should advocate for legal reform that would influence the rules that judges apply, not reform that would virtually bar a segment of our population from the courtroom.

Supporting the LSC when it contributes to judicial rulings that we find undesirable tests our commitment to effective judicial access, just as disagreeable speech by others tests our willingness to support freedom of expression. If we support those principles only when we like the results, as Bauer would have us do, our commitment to a democratic society is hollow and meaningless.

MANUEL GARCIA Y GRIEGO

Assistant Professor

Politics and Society

UC Irvine