[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 4912-4913]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   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

[[Page 4913]]

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.

                          ____________________