Poor May Be Defenseless Plan Guts Legal Services For Needy

It soon could be almost impossible for the poor to find free lawyers in Spokane.

Congress is considering bills this week that slash federal spending on poverty law and gut the city’s primary legal services for the poor.

The legislation offends many attorneys by stripping away client confidentiality in some cases and making it tough to collect any fees.

Jim Bamberger, director of the Spokane Legal Services Center, said the bills are far worse than he feared.

He said they could decimate his 10-attorney shop at 1704 W. Broadway, which strives to defend Spokane’s poor from unfair landlords, violent spouses and public assistance glitches.

“I’d like to be optimistic, but I’ve got to be planning for the worst,” Bamberger said, noting he’d already warned about 200 clients that his office might have to drop their cases after Jan. 1.

The House and Senate are voting on similar changes to the Legal Services Corporation, a federal program that provides more than half the money for legal clinics like Spokane’s center.

The bills cut about 30 percent of the federal cash with an intent to wean the programs off the U.S. Treasury. They also create restrictions on the programs, including:

Waiving attorney-client privileges in some cases “to determine the quantity and quality of service rendered.”

Forbidding work on divorce, family law and consumer fraud cases.

Preventing attorneys from accepting cases - such as unlawful evictions - in which a victorious attorney could expect to get paid for handling them.

The conditions stunned the Washington State Bar Association.

“This legislation includes onerous regulations designed to make legal representation of the poor impossible for ethical lawyers,” wrote Edward Shea, president of the bar, in a letter to Washington’s congressional delegation.

Rep. George Nethercutt, R-Wash., opposes phasing out all federal money for legal services.

But the Spokane congressman supports some cuts and a return to the “core mission of helping poor people with their basic needs,” said spokesman Ken Lisaius.

The House is expected to vote on its bill by Wednesday. The Senate faces the same issue next week.

Critics say Congress is coddling landlords and orchard owners who tell lawmakers the public should not finance liberal crusading attorneys who incite the poor and needlessly cost businesses money.

“It’s the orchard owners and landlords relief act of 1995,” said Bamberger.

He said some of the contributors to the center’s $1.2 million budget have already told him they will stop giving money if the center runs under the rules Congress is considering.

, DataTimes