Not on our time UA lawyers lobby for less work
Guest writer
The editorial writers of this paper of record aptly wrote against the renewed efforts of the University of Arkansas to undermine the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). University representatives recently appeared before a task force set up by the Legislature and governor last session—on which I serve happily without compensation—to advise on amendments to the FOIA.
At the most recent meeting of the task force, two university six-figured state-salaried attorneys quite openly discussed how the university wrote the first version of this FOIA-gutting bill (which would’ve created a special exemption only for universities) picked up by Bart Hester and Bob Ballinger in the last session. The bill was designed to make university attorneys’ jobs easier.
So, on the government dime and time, these government employees came to lobby for less work. Can you imagine a DMV employee coming during her working hours to ask for more breaks?
The university representatives then repeated the same false parade of horribles allegedly caused by our great FOIA that the university lamented before the Legislature last session. Those very assertions, however, were already debunked by the media (with the aid of the FOIA).
That apparently didn’t stop the university from dusting off its old, untrue talking points. The approach seems to be to keep repeating the falsehoods, hoping someone will believe them.
During the meeting, one university representative lectured the task force on how the university has different rights under the very same state FOIA law depending in which court they appear. When I instructed her that she was wrong, she told me that we have different “opinions” on the law.
Well, regardless of whether my description of the law on which I published my book (titled The Arkansas Freedom of Information Act) is “opinion” or “fact,” I can tell you, I’m right.
The other university representative told the task force that only after having left private practice for the comfort of her current government job did she realize the hardship of having to comply with the component of the FOIA that she seeks to erase. She indicated that she’d prefer to reduce such obligations so that she can act more like she did when in private practice.
I’m sure she does! I wish my mother still packed my lunch. But we’re all adults now and government attorneys get paid to work, not rest.
Moreover, here are some aspects of publicly funded counsel jobs that differ from private practice:
1. In private practice, you don’t have a guaranteed six-figure salary.
2. In private practice, you can be sued in court for money. The university cannot. (In fact, the university attorneys until recently were telling their employees that they could sue for damages in court under the Whistle-Blower Act while simultaneously telling the Supreme Court the exact opposite. Whoops.)
3. In private practice, the people of Arkansas don’t fund your litigation expenses from a near bottomless pit of taxpayer dollars.
4. In private practice, your client might not pay you.
5. In private practice, you have to go out and get clients. They’re not handed to you.
6. In private practice, you don’t represent the people of the great state of Arkansas.
Ihave no problem with government attorneys lobbying for laws they want, even if they want bad laws. I do have a problem when they do it on publicly paid time, seeking legislation that would by design make their jobs easier.
That seems wrong, and wrongheaded, to me.