Why Cutting the Budget for Legal Services Corporation by Over 25% Doesn't Make Sense

In essence, the proposed cut would reduce the LSC funding to a level of over a decade ago, and would result in reducing the funding for the Maryland Legal Aid Bureau by $1.15 million a year, according to the article.

LSC is the biggest ''provider of civil legal aid for low-income Americans in the nation,'' according to information at the organization's website. Established almost forty years ago, ''LSC operates as an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation that promotes equal access to justice and provides grants for high-quality civil legal assistance to low-income Americans. LSC distributes about 95 percent of its total funding to 136 independent nonprofit legal aid programs with more than 900 offices that provide legal assistance to low-income individuals and families throughout the nation.''


The need for legal services may be greater than ever before, due largely to the increased volume of foreclosures, bankruptcy and domestic violence - much of which has been caused by the state of the economy.

Per the article, over 60 million Americans are eligible for civil legal aid. This has led to an overwhelming strain on legal aid programs around the country. Also per the article, a recent study showed that because of underfunding, ''less than 20 percent of the legal needs of low-income Americans are being met.''

Levi put forth his arguments for taxpayer support of civil legal assistance.

First, and foremost, everyone should have access to justice; the very fiber of our nation promulgates it. In addition, the existence of civil legal assistance is a key component of our civil justice system, and its proper, timely functioning. Those who are unrepresented slow the efficiency of the court system, and in the end, may face more severe consequences, thus creating a vicious cycle, for both the individuals and the court system.

Levi recognizes that throwing money at the problem will not cure all ills. He explains that the LSC board of directors is looking to increase pro bono efforts through a task force, as well as seeking to utilize technology to the furthest extent possible in order to increase overall efficiency regarding forms, information and other issues.

However, in the end, these efforts, while part of the solution, will not make up for a 26 percent budget cut. It will, in essence, cripple the LSC, and severely limit the purpose of the organization - to provide legal assistance to those who so desperately need it the most.

Levi urges Congress to reject the proposal, for as he puts it, ''As Americans, we all share a responsibility to keep the flame of equal justice alive.''