Continuing Resolution: GOP Amendment Bans Payments to Environmental Litigants

By Phil Taylor, E&E reporter

February 18, 2011

An amendment to the House's continuing resolution approved last night would impose a six-month freeze on payments to individuals and groups that bring successful lawsuits against the federal government.

The amendment by Wyoming Rep. Cynthia Lummis, which passed on a 232-197 vote, would shed light on what ranchers, farmers and some Western lawmakers contend is an abuse of taxpayer money by environmental groups.

The amendment halts payments under a little-known law called the Equal Access to Justice Act, which allows individuals and small groups to be compensated for attorney fees after winning a case or forcing a settlement with a federal agency.

Some critics contend that the act has become a vehicle for abuse by environmental groups that sue to block uses of public lands such as grazing and oil and gas leasing.

"I'm pleased that members of Congress recognized the need for a moratorium on these payments," Lummis said after the amendment passed on the House floor, "just so we can take a deep breath and learn where the money is going."

A Republican request to the Department of Justice last Congress for information on who is receiving EAJA funds and how much is being spent turned up no results, prompting the Congressional Western Caucus to introduce legislation that would force transparency into EAJA payments (Land Letter, March 4, 2010).

Lummis said she plans to introduce similar legislation soon this year and that she has a Democratic sponsor willing to usher the bill through the Senate.

"We need to find out whether the law is being abused," she said. "In the spirit of good government and transparency, we hope to learn if this fund is functioning how it originally was intended when it was passed in 1980."

Lummis' amendment was cheered late last night by Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso (R), who said he would help push such a provision through his chamber when it takes up its version of the spending bill.

"It's very important to the people of Wyoming and I think the people of this country as well," he said.

But Lummis' amendment could backfire, said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, one of several environmental groups that has benefited from EAJA.

"A freeze on payments to who?" he asked, suggesting other individuals could suffer without the legal redress EAJA offers.

Suckling said the perception that environmental groups are the only ones benefitting from EAJA payments belies the fact that environmental lawsuits make up a tiny portion of EAJA recipients. Other cases include grievances over trademark infringement and sexual harassment.

"The Equal Access to Justice Act is probably the most important democratic tool that allows private citizens and noncorporations access to justice in America," Suckling said, citing a minimum wage U.S. Postal Service worker who is able under EAJA to sue for sexual harassment as one theoretical example. "For a Republican congressperson to say only wealthy corporations can sue the government is the height of hypocrisy and corporate boosterism."

Reporter Sarah Abruzzese contributed.