September 1, 2014 Letters
Letters
Don’t Raise Fees
We ought not raise Florida Bar fees one more penny. Real people are struggling for legal services, this is true, but so are new attorneys thrown into a post-recession spiral.
The reality is that the legal market is flooded. I am one of these indigent attorneys who would qualify not only for “S.N.A.P.” food stamps or an Affordable Care Act stipend, but also my very own legal aid attorney or public defender; heck, even they may qualify for their own services.
It is very humbling to go through the channels to become a licensed attorney in Florida. The barrage of incidental fees are astounding, aside from the sticker shock of a one grand signup fee: the nonrefundable/nontransferable $160 laptop fee (each time) for the essay day, various background investigation fees totaling hundreds of dollars, and attendant costs of the MPRE. Take note, also, of bar exam travel and price-gouging hotel rates in Tampa those weekdays.
Immediately upon licensure, you are hit with a pro-rata Bar fees bill statement for $176.64; within six months you are then assessed the full $265 bill for the coming year. What a relief as a new attorney, the Bar has a three-installment payment plan available. Oh, and then there is the mandatory CLE Basic Skills Requirements. Within your first few years, you must take four specific courses, each at about $180 a pop, approaching nearly $750 in total. (Why aren’t these online video repeats included in my fees?)
Hopefully, your new barista job at the local Starbucks (which you studied at over the summer) qualifies for a good enough line of credit to take out a private loan. The members petitioning likely work at an organization or law firm, which subsidizes the employees’ annual Bar fees, putting many of them (and their wallets) a few steps removed from the impact.
I am a newly licensed attorney in Florida. To get to this momentous juncture, I have had to put everything on the line, since I have no family trust fund. I did not come from a family of professionals, nor did either of my parents graduate from high school. I made every prudent and pragmatic decision in attending public institutions for my entire education. This was sponsored primarily by scholarships, grants, service-based fellowships, and yet, I still ended up with approaching six-figures of student loan debt.
I do not have a legal job in this volatile market. I do have exceptional internship and volunteer experience. I have spent the entire post-licensure year at American Civil Liberties Union of Florida as a volunteer. Also, I currently have a pro bono bankruptcy case from Dade Legal Aid/Put Something Back program. But I still have a desire to fulfill that dream that sparked in elementary school. A dream of being a fine-tuned, seasoned litigator and passionate advocate of social justice. My own economic insecurity should not bar me from that dream. We must reform this profession from the ground up. We must stop charging so much just to participate in administering justice to all. That starts right here at home, my new state of Florida.
Austyn W. Sanders
Wynwood/Miami
Reform Judicial Appointments
When I was a child, I used to enjoy the masterpiece movie, Miracle on 34th Street. I often wondered, however, about the real function of the fellow with the cigar, whispering in the ear of the judge who had to adjudicate the bona fides of Santa Claus. He seemed to have free access to the judge’s chambers.
As a senior lawyer and arbitrator, I now know all too well the function and influence of bundlers and consultants in judicial campaigns. They aren’t talking about Santa Claus.
It is past time for our Bar to debate, consider, and recommend a new system for the appointment of judges. The present spectacle of judicial campaigns is repugnant, the underhanded tactics demeaning, and the hurling accusations between candidates disgusting. Most citizens have no idea who they are voting for or why. Judicial candidates are soliciting endorsements from many groups interested in influence. Millions of dollars are being raised in the legal community to pay for media advertisements and the services of political consultants. Most lawyers who contribute do so in order to support and advance the quality of the bench. Some do it for raw influence and tactical advantage. Anyone with clear eyesight can see who the players are and their monied object.
Judges staring at a competitive race are forced to default to political street currency and are exposed to its intimidation. Lawyers and firms who are major bundlers are not to be crossed. Lawyers who are pressed dare not contribute for fear of prejudice to their matters. In the end, this circus of money only further erodes whatever confidence in the integrity of the justice system the public has left.
This is not to say that the present political appointment system is a paragon of virtue. Games are played within this system as well.
We can do better, and we should involve more people affected by the system than the lawyer-loaded commissions. Who says that lawyers should be the dominant voice in the selection of judicial nominees? Or even that the governor should be the final appointing officer? Let’s spend some time as good citizens to find and legislate a better way to get the finest, most diverse bench we can — and close down the circus.
Thomas R. Spencer
Miami
Same-Sex Divorce
Regarding the August 15 article “Family Law Section to weigh in on same-sex divorce,” I am dismayed to see that the imprimatur of The Florida Bar has once again been hijacked to further a political agenda.
The fig leaf of justification for the Family Law Section filing an amicus brief in favor of same-sex divorce jurisdiction is laughable. While it claims to be taking no position on same-sex marriage, the section feels compelled to enter the fray under the aegis of “access to the courts.” This limitless concept can be used to justify involvement in all manner of social/political issues beyond the scope of the Bar’s mission. Moreover, the issue at hand can be amply resolved by application of long-standing principles of conflict of laws.
Same-sex marriage and divorce are controversial issues of public policy, which should properly be resolved by the democratic process and the court of public opinion. Indeed, the Florida Constitution appears definitive on the issue by defining marriage as between one man and one woman and “no other union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent shall be valid or recognized.”
We lawyers have a perfect right to speak out on issues of public policy both as individuals and through groups of like-minded citizens. But Florida lawyers do not have the right to use the prestige of our mandatory-membership Bar to stamp a seal of approval on their political objectives.
John DiChiara
Port St. Lucie
( Editor’s Note: The Family Law Section will advocate using its own voluntary fees and must clearly distinguish itself from The Florida Bar when furthering its position.)
Priorities, People!
One of the biggest topics in the News over the past year has been “diversity.” Like “justice” or “fairness,” the word “diversity” can mean so many things to so many people that it is a useless standard for any type of rule or regulation.
It is, after all, the first canon of statutory interpretation that the plain meaning of a statute should control, unless there are very good reasons and evidence otherwise. And what hope, pray tell, do we have of obtaining the plain meaning of “diversity”? It is a fool’s errand.
So while we argue back and forth about a word that can mean so much that it practically means nothing at all, the Bar lets real priorities languish. Why aren’t we doing something about improving access to good lawyers and competent representation? Why aren’t we figuring out ways to enforce rules against bad faith litigation by insurance firms that run amok in courts after habitual knee jerk denials of demand letters?
Or here’s one that might have a positive impact on lawyers and their clients alike: Improving the absolutely abominable system in Florida for reciprocity with other states. It is shameful that Florida has no arrangements for reciprocity with any other state. Instead, a few lawyers jealously guard their domain by raising the barriers to entry for others who could serve consumers and improve competition.
Here is my proposal: Hire an independent committee of economists to consult and analyze how best to improve the markets for legal representation in terms of access and quality in the state. Mark Killian’s “Legal profession must change with the times or be left behind” from the July 15 News was an outstanding primer on this. Maybe we can get things done based on hard facts and numbers, while people argue “diversity” until they’re blue in the face.
Christian Waugh
Lady Lake
Economic Justice
The chickens are coming home to roost.
We are now living with the results of 40 years of deregulation — not the kind of deregulation that stops government from placing unnecessary burdens on its citizens, but the kind that took away the protections that ensured a level economic playing field.
Today’s unrealistic levels of inequality are not the result of an American welfare state, creeping socialism, or a lazy workforce. They are the result of 40 years of big corporate money controlling our laws and regulations to favor their business and personal interests at the expense of the poor and middle class. Over the last 40 years, wages have stagnated while productivity has increased 74.5 percent. The minimum wage in 1974 was $2 an hour. The equivalent wage in today’s dollars would be $13.39 an hour, yet today’s minimum wage is only $7.25.
The overwhelming majority of legal fees in this country are paid directly by the middle class or by businesses that are dependent upon middle-class spending. Every day, more middle-class citizens are becoming poor and more businesses are downsizing or closing. A declining middle class has a direct effect on big business and a devastating effect on small businesses, e.g., law firms.
Our infrastructure is crumbling, cities are being abandoned, and our environment keeps getting more toxic. Florida has been spared much of this decay so far because so many of the retiring baby boomers are moving here. They are able to do so because they had fixed benefit retirement plans. But today, that kind of guaranteed retirement income is quickly becoming a thing of the past.
Our education system is in deep trouble. We have never had a higher drop-out rate. We have to look to other countries for certain types of skilled people. Our colleges and universities are being run more like businesses than institutions of higher learning. More than half of today’s college graduates cannot find work in their chosen field and, even if they could, they matriculate with so much debt that they will never be able to repay it. Our children will not be able to enjoy the same standard of living that we have today, much less a better one.
How about health care? Other than trauma care, where we are probably the best in the world, we rank at or near the bottom in every other area of health care compared to the other industrialized countries. And we pay much more for our health care than any other industrialized country. Like our colleges and universities, our hospitals have become more like businesses where the bottom line trumps all other concerns.
What about justice? Our entire system of justice depends on a robust and prosperous economy. Our economy provides the funding, through taxes, court costs, and legal fees that our justice system must have to function. Today, the state tax base has eroded to the point where we cannot properly fund our courts, we cannot fund our legal aid organizations, and we cannot hire enough judges.
We will never have equal justice or access to justice or meaningful justice until we have economic justice. The term “economic justice” is not code for “wealth redistribution.” Economic justice means a set of laws and rules that provide an equal opportunity for people to rise on their own merits, a system with a level playing field where hard work, ingenuity, and sacrifice allow anyone to attain a better life. In decades past, this kind of system was commonly known as “the American Way.” Academics referred to it as “Western Democratic Capitalism.” And it was taken for granted. It no longer exists. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. It is an American issue.
As lawyers, we are privileged to have the ability to be leaders in our communities, our state, and our nation. And we have a long history of doing so. Our principal founding fathers were lawyers — Jefferson, Adams, Madison. In fact, 35 of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention were lawyers or had the benefit of legal training. The presidents who brought us through some of our worst times — Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt — all were lawyers before they became presidents. And it was courageous lawyers and judges who implemented the achievements of the Civil Rights Movement. So our legacy and our privilege calls upon us to stand up and lead our country back to prosperity, fairness, and justice.
I wrote this piece to start a discussion on how we as lawyers can take the lead in restoring economic justice in America. We will not get it by asking for it. We must work for it and fight for it. One of the questions we must answer is: What should the role of The Florida Bar be? I submit to you that The Florida Bar must make economic justice a permanent priority in its mission.
I didn’t write this piece to point out the problems without having some ideas on how to fix them. That will take another letter. If the discussion starts, I will write it. I would like to hear the ideas of my colleagues at the Bar. The time to act is now. Let’s get started.
Carlton “Duke” Fagan
Jacksonville
