Letter on H.R. 3764, the "Civil Access to Justice Act of 2009"

The Honorable Steve Cohen

Chairman
Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
Committee on the Judiciary
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Trent Franks
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
Committee on the Judiciary
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Cohen and Ranking Member Franks:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest business federation representing the interests of more than three million business and organizations of every size, sector, and region, opposes certain provisions in H.R. 3764, the "Civil Access to Justice Act of 2009," which would make amendments to the "Legal Services Corporation Act." While the Chamber supports the intent of the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), which provides low-income citizens with adequate legal counsel who would otherwise not be able to afford it, the Chamber is concerned with some of the provisions related to the significant expansion of funding and the repeal of restrictions on funding class action lawsuits.

The bill would increase funding for the LSC to $750 million for FY2010-FY2015—an increase of more than 75 percent from its current budget of $420 million. The LSC, in contrast, has only requested approximately $516 million for the next fiscal year. In today's harsh and unstable economic environment, the government should not be allocating additional tax-payer dollars to fund private litigation. Further, the legislation clearly reverses funding restrictions on class-action litigation that Congress implemented in 1996. Under current law, the LSC is not allowed to initiate or fund policy-changing class action litigation. To change this policy and allow the LSC to use certain funds to initiate class action litigation is effectively a federal subsidy that flows directly into the pockets of the trial bar. Class action litigation is known for providing very little benefit to class members and great benefit to those attorneys involved in the litigation. Scarce tax-payer dollars should not be used to fund such an expansion of speculative, costly, and unwise private litigation at any time, and especially not in today's vulnerable economic climate.

While supportive of the underlying purpose of the LSC, the Chamber is concerned with these particular amendments and urges you to oppose them.

Sincerely,

R. Bruce Josten

Cc: The Members of the House Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law