The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR A FEW” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S2558 on April 10, 2013.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR A FEW
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise today to ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an article written by Ken Hamilton, Executive Vice President of the Wyoming Farm Bureau that was Published in the April 2013 edition of Wyoming Agriculture. The article's title is ``Equal Access to Justice for a few.''
Mr. President, while we continue to fight for increased transparency with regards to the Equal Access to Justice Act, one thing is already clear--the Federal Government is picking winners and losers. Mr. Hamilton calls this a ``cozy appearance between the groups who sue the Federal Government and the desire by the government to help pay their way.'' He points out in one recent case of several environmental groups suing the Fish and Wildlife Service over wolf delisting efforts where the Federal Government quickly approved their November 2012 claim for
$380,000 in attorney fees. That is $380,000 dollars of hard-earned American taxpayer dollars this administration's Justice Department was more than happy to hand over to their political allies.
Ken continues to illustrate the apparent political fingerprints and favoritism in the Justice Department by stating, ``Meanwhile back at the ranch, the Wyoming Wolf Coalition through its attorney Harriet Hageman, has asked the Federal Government for their fees under EAJA. These fees, one-tenth of the environmental claim, have been argued over by the same Federal Government since April of 2011.'' Let me repeat that. Since 2011, the Justice Department has been actively arguing over an EAJA claim of approximately $36,000 to a group that supported wolf delisting when the same Justice Department agreed to send $380,000 to environmental groups opposed to the delisting of wolves.
Based on these facts I would have to agree with Ken's conclusion that, ``the Equal Access to Justice Act is being applied less than equally by the Federal Government. It appears that if they agree with you they will send you a check, but if they do not they will send you an attorney's response denying you your money.''
This administration should not be in the business of playing favorites by rewarding their political friends with taxpayer dollars. I commend Ken for highlighting the apparent inequality and abuse of the so-called Equal Access to Justice Act. This is one of the reasons I plan to continue fighting for real transparency regarding which groups are receiving EAJA payments, why they are receiving it, and how much money--taxpayer money--is being given away. It is time the Equal Access to Justice Act truly live up to its name.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
[From the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation Opinion Editorial, Mar. 26,
2013]
Equal Access to Justice for a Few
(By Ken Hamilton, Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Executive Vice
President)
Many people are aware of the efforts to reform the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) in order to bring more transparency to the process of the federal government paying attorney fees. Based on information researched and brought to light through the Budd-Falen law offices we found out that monies were being awarded without the slightest effort by the government to keep track of who received them and why. Thus, the need for some transparency and oversight. We have also seen some of the recipients fight efforts to bring transparency and why wouldn't they? After all, this is something that helps off-set their cost of suing the federal government.
The other aspect of this that some have wondered about is the sometimes cozy appearance between these groups who sue the federal government and the desire by the government to help pay their way.
Recently, several environmental groups settled with the federal government over their attorney fees for suing the Fish and Wildlife Service on wolf delisting efforts in Montana and Idaho. The settlement agreed to by the federal government will pay the groups $380,000 for their attorney fees. This request for money was filed with the courts in November of 2012 and the government didn't object to this filing.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, the Wyoming Wolf Coalition through its attorney Harriet Hageman, has asked the federal government for their fees under EAJA. These fees, a tenth of the environmental claim, have been argued over by the same federal government since April of 2011.
Given this interesting development it certainly appears the federal government, through the Justice Department, does not apply justice uniformly. Perhaps the Justice Department is concerned that these multimillion dollar environmental groups should be paid because they have resources far beyond the troublesome rancher, sportsmen, outfitters and local governments and they could use the money but those other entities should be denied because they are poor.
Perhaps they feel that almost $400,000 is not a big deal, but $36,000 is a huge deal worthy of Justice Department attorney time to file objections.
Who knows, but one thing is apparent and that is the Equal Access to Justice Act is being applied less than equally by the federal government. It appears that if they agree with you they will send you a check, but if they do not they will send you an attorney's response denying you your money.
____________________
