Not final until 8:30 but likely the 1NC


Topicality: 1NC- Removing A Barrier
A. Increase is direct growth not removing a barrier
Random House Webster’s College Dictionary 96

Increase: 1)to make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment 2)to become greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality 3)to multiply by propagation 4)growth or augmentation in size, strength, quality 5)the act or process of increasing

B. The affirmative team does not increase the amount of social services but removes a restriction legal services
C. Limits- Removing barriers opens the floodgates and overstretches our research burden
Impact - Topic-specific education: under their interpretation of debate, we never learn about the social services and how they affect the poor but only about legal barriers.
D. Plan is at best FX topical-
E. Evaluate T in a framework of competing interpretations; if we win that our interpretation is best for debate, you vote them down. Reasonability is arbitrary and mandates judge intervention

1NC States

The fifty states and all relevant territories should to provide funding for class action lawsuits and lawyer fees for people who qualify for legal services and legal aid.
Statewide systems allow for better access
Houseman ‘02, Director of the Center for Law and Social Policy, which is counsel to the National Legal Aid and Defender
(Alan W., “Access to Justice Conference September 11, 2001: Civil Legal Assistance for Low-Income Persons: Looking Back and Looking Forward,” Fordham Urban Law Journal, Lexis, p. 12)
Over the last thirty-five years, civil legal assistance in the United States has developed from a haphazard program with limited private funding into a significant $ 800 million institution. The legal aid program has a long history of effective representation of low-income persons and has achieved a number of significant results in the courts, administrative agencies, and legislative bodies. The federal program has expanded access throughout the country and provided significant relief to millions of needy persons. Without the [*1243] civil legal assistance program, there would be virtually no access to justice for low-income persons residing in the country.
These accomplishments do not suggest that the civil legal assistance system should remain static. On the contrary, considerable change is needed. The civil legal assistance community has begun transforming its structure into a more effective system. Even if Congress had not imposed restrictions and reduced funding in 1996, the legal services community would have needed to create a statewide system of civil legal assistance in each state. This restructuring was necessary to obtain new funding, increase access for low-income people, and improve the effectiveness of legal assistance providers. The reorganization has helped build a broader base of public support for civil legal assistance. The civil legal assistance community needed a new system to ensure that low-income persons were represented in all relevant forums where decisions affecting their lives are made. Advocacy activities had to be effectively coordinated within and among states, and all advocates participating in the system needed to have access to information, training, and assistance to provide effective legal advice.The directions for the future are clear. The civil legal assistance community must develop a stronger base of public support within the general public and among key local leaders. Moreover, it must move forward to create integrated, comprehensive statewide systems. States that have not begun serious efforts to create new systems must do so. The overarching goal has been and will continue to be equal justice for all. While the United States has far to go to reach that goal, it is moving down the path that will someday achieve a civil justice system that guarantees equal justice for all.

Positive Incentives CP

Text: The United States federal government should offer positive incentives for
    • businesses to not practice environmentally destructive practices in impoverished areas.
    • banks and lenders that receive high repay rates of people living in poverty
Positive incentives better influence business action
Journal of Business Ethics, 04
(John C. Ruhka and Heidi Boerstler, 11/30/04 __ content/px04170562666117/__)
This article presents an overview of traditional legal and regulatory incentives directed at achieving lawful corporate behavior, together with examples of more recent governmental incentives aimed at encouraging self regulation activities by corporations. These incentives have been differentiated into positive incentives that benefit corporations for actions that encourage or assist lawful behavior, and punitive incentives that only punish corporations for violations of legal or regulatory standards. This analysis indicates that traditional legal and regulatory incentives for lawful corporate behavior are overwhelmingly punitive in their intended effects, while more recent governmental incentives to encourage voluntary corporate self regulation are much more positive in their intended effects. A prototype private compliance system containing typical features specified in governmental incentives for corporate self regulation was then analyzed applying the same positive/punitive analysis that was performed with the governmental incentives. This analysis suggests that corporate compliance programs that are structured to comply with Department of Defense regulations for defense contractors or the new Federal Organizational Sentencing Guidelines will reflect the same overwhelmingly punitive balance of incentives for lawful and ethical employee conduct as do the traditional legal and regulatory incentive systems for lawful corporate behavior.

Business Confidence Uniqueness Card (We will have one for the 1NC. We just need to cut it)]
Business Confidence LInks

Class action lawsuits destroy business confidence- Asbestos cases prove
CQ Federal Department and Agency Documents, 05
(CQ Federal Department and Agency Documents, Regulatory Intelligence Data, January 5, 2005, “Legal reform: the high costs of lawsuit abuse”, Lexis)

Today's Presidential Action ú Today, President Bush highlighted the need for common-sense medical liability reform to protect patients, to stop the sky-rocketing costs associated with frivolous lawsuits, to make health care more affordable and accessible for all of health care while improving quality and safety. President Bush 's framework for addressing the medical liability crisis in America seeks to make health care more affordable and accessible for all Americans by making the medical liability system more stable and predictable, and to protect patients by reducing the disincentives for reporting medical errors and complications. ú The President also stressed the need for class action lawsuit reform and asbestos litigation reform, and he urged Congress to enact proposed reforms. Class action lawsuits are an important part of the U.S. legal system. However, when the ability to bring a class action lawsuit is abused, it truly harms injured parties and undermines the American judicial system. The growing problem of asbestos litigation is similarly hurting workers, bankrupting businesses, and delaying relief for the truly sick claimants. Background on Today's Presidential Action The costs of litigation per person in the United States are far higher than in any other major industrialized nation in the world. Lawsuit costs have risen substantially over the past several decades, and a significant part of the costs from lawsuits goes to paying lawyers' fees and transaction costs -- not to the injured parties. This explosion in litigation is creating a logjam in America's civil courts and threatening jobs across America. Small businesses spend, on average, about $150,000 per year on litigation expenses. The President is urging Congress to pass legislation that reduces the burden of frivolous lawsuits on our economy. President Bush supports enactment of medical liability reform, class action lawsuit reform, and asbestos litigation reform to expedite resolutions and curb the costs of lawsuits for all Americans. Curbing Lawsuit Abuse with Needed Medical Liability Reform ú Frivolous lawsuits and excessive jury awards are driving many health care providers out of communities and forcing doctors to practice overly defensive medicine. This reduces access to medically necessary services and raises the costs of health care for all. The President has proposed proven reforms, such as common-sense limits on non-economic damages, to make the medical liability system more fair, predictable, and timely. ú The President's framework for addressing the medical liability crisis includes: ú Securing the ability of injured patients to get quick, unlimited compensation for their "economic losses," including the loss of ability to provide unpaid services like care for children or parents; ú Ensuring recoveries for non-economic damages do not exceed a reasonable amount ($250,000); ú Reserving punitive damages for egregious cases where they are justified, and limiting damages to reasonable amounts; ú Providing for payments of judgments over time rather than in a single lump sum, to ensure that appropriate payments are made when patients need them; ú Ensuring that old cases cannot be brought to court years after an event; and ú Providing that defendants pay judgments in proportion to their fault. Returning Justice to the Truly Injured with Class Action Reform ú The President supports class action reforms to limit the abuse of large, nationwide class action cases and return justice to the truly injured parties. Class action lawsuits are an important part of the U.S. legal system. However, the class action system is heavily abused, which in turn does not benefit injured parties and undermines the American judicial system. In particular, injured parties often receive awards of little or no value while lawyers receive large fees. The proposed class action reform legislation recognizes that large interstate class action lawsuits deserve Federal court access because they typically affect more citizens, involve more money, and implicate more interstate commerce issues than any other types of lawsuits. These reforms do not alter the right of a plaintiff to bring a legitimate claim, or change controlling substantive law, but they do provide additional protection and information to class members. Aiding Asbestos Victims with a Fair System and Long-Term Solution ú Victims of asbestos-related diseases deserve a fair system and a long- term solution. The current system may leave little or no funds to pay current and future asbestos victims; is costly to administer (future transaction costs are estimated at between $145 and $210 billion); will impose large, indirect costs on the economy; and has driven exposed defendants, including small businesses, into bankruptcy. Asbestos, as the longest-running mass tort litigation in U.S. history, has led to the bankruptcies of at least 74 companies. Within the past few years, there have been sharp increases in the number of asbestos claims filed annually. The President has stressed the need for reform and commended Congress for aggressively working on this problem, but more work needs to be done to pass legislation for the President to sign that provides a fair and permanent solution.
Impacts – Business Confidence

Confidence is key to prevent economic collapse

Braithwaite ’04 (John, Australian Research Council Federation fellow, Australian National University, and is the chair of the Regulatory Institutions Network; “Emancipation and Hope” March, 592 Annals 79 ln)
The challenge of designing institutions that simultaneously engender emancipation and hope is addressed within the assumption of economic institutions that are fundamentally capitalist. This contemporary global context gives more force to the hope nexus because we know capitalism thrives on hope. When business confidence collapses, capitalist economies head for recession. This dependence on hope is of quite general import; business leaders must have hope for the future before they will build new factories; consumers need confidence before they will buy what the factories make; investors need confidence before they will buy shares in the company that builds the factory; bankers need confidence to lend money to build the factory; scientists need confidence to innovate with new technologies in the hope that a capitalist will come along and market their invention. Keynes's ([1936]1981) General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money lamented the theoretical neglect of "animal spirits" of hope ("spontaneous optimism rather than . . . mathematical expectation" (p. 161) in the discipline of economics, a neglect that continues to this day (see also Barbalet 1993).

Politics Health care 1NC

Health care reform will pass – even the critics admit that Obama will be able to sell it
Bloomberg, 7-25-09, news?pid=20601087&sid= aIiiRyGaM.Os
The top Senate Republican drafting health-care legislation and a leader of House Democrats balking at the plan said they don’t expect committee and floor-vote delays to keep a bill from passing this year. Charles Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said “it’s going to be difficult” for his panel to approve legislation in the next two weeks. Beyond that, the odds of Congress enacting an overhaul later this year are “very, very good,” the Iowa senator said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. Representative Mike Ross of Arkansas, chairman of the health-care task force for the Blue Dog Coalition, about 50 self-described fiscally conservative House Democrats, said it would be a mistake for Speaker Nancy Pelosi to bring the measure to the chamber’s floor before lawmakers take their August recess. “I don’t think they have the votes,” Ross said in a separate “Political Capital” interview. By year’s end, “we will meet the president’s goal of passing meaningful and substantive health-care reform,” he also said.
Link- Plan unpop

LSC unpopular. Opponents have the upper hand
Atkinson 01 – Professor of Law @ Florida State University College of Law
[Rob Atkinson, “A SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC CRITIQUE OF PRO BONO PUBLICO REPRESENTATION OF THE POOR: THE GOOD AS THE ENEMY OF THE BEST,” American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, 2001, 9 Am. U.J. Gender Soc. Pol'y & L. 129
As every student of Constitutional law - and Poverty Law - knows, the guarantee of a publicly-paid lawyer extends to very few non-criminal matters. n86 But that is no reason why other legal services to the poor could not be funded in the same way. In fact, of course, some are, and have been for decades. That is precisely what the federal Legal Services Corporation and its local affiliates and analogues do: provide lawyers to indigents in civil matters at the general taxpayers' expense. (And, as we have seen, that is the rule in most of Western Europe today.) But virtually no one believes that this publicly funded system, as currently funded, is anywhere near sufficient to meet all the legitimate legal needs of the poor. Why not expand it?
Here, of course, we meet hard political reality, and here, I shall argue, the response of liberalism's left has been very shallow moral and economic theory. Liberals of the left believe we should expand public provision of legal services to the poor (even liberals of the center believe we should not contract it). But opponents have had the upper hand, and the cause of expansion has been a rear-guard action, not a vanguard, since the end of Johnson's Great Society. n87[*151] Faced with that politically reality, proponents of expanded legal services to the poor made a fateful choice. They essentially abandoned the high ground of publicly funded legal services and turned to a much less ambitious alternative: mandatory pro bono. n88 We have already seen why, of these two means, mandatory pro bono is the second best. What remains to be seen, in the next section, is how its advocates have played into the hands of opponents of the best.

Link- Cost PC

Plan uses political capital – spending and controversy
Houseman 05,
(Alan W., Director, Center for Law and Social Policy, “The Future of Civil Legal Aid in the United States,” November 2005, publications/future_legal_aid. pdf)
Supporters of increased federal funding will have to overcome significant political barriers to substantially (as opposed to incrementally) increase federal funding for civil legal assistance. Although LSC leadership has made substantial progress in developing a much stronger bipartisan consensus in favor of funding for LSC, U.S. political leadership remains divided about whether there should be a federally funded program, and, if so, whether it should be through the federal LSC program or via a block grant program administered by the states. In addition, there are substantial efforts to reduce U.S. domestic discretionary spending over the next five years in order to address the substantial federal budget deficit that has resulted primarily from the tax reductions and the increased spending on defense and homeland security. In May, the Congress passed its budget resolution, which would reduce domestic discretionary spending by more than $200 billion over the next five years. The budget directives are playing out now during the appropriations process. These cuts would grow deeper over time and are projected to affect all domestic discretionary spending, including LSC funds and other federal funds available for civil legal aid. The President’s budget proposal for FY 2006 illustrates how the federal budget issues impacts civil legal aid. The Administration has proposed to cut funding for LSC by 5 percent. This would reduce funding available to the national legal aid program to $318.2 million, an amount less than the $321 million LSC received in 1980. This year, FY 2005, LSC lost funding from an appropriate level of $335.3 million in FY 2004 to an appropriate level of $330.8 million in FY 2005. The Board of Directors of LSC has requested $363.8 million for FY 2006. The House adopted an appropriation of $330.8 million. The Senate agreed to a level of $358 million. The conference committee, however, only recommended the House level of $330.8 million. This amount may be reduced even further if across-the-board decreases are imposed on all or most domestic discretionary programs

Political capital key to healthcare reform
Chiropractic Economics 7-7-2009 chiropractic/news/7360/861/ Prioritizing-healthcare- reform-components/
INDIANAPOLIS – Faced with a barrage of pressing issues, the Obama administration has placed health-care reform high on its agenda. The timing bodes well for change, according to Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., director of the Indiana University Center for Health Policy and Professionalism, associate professor of pediatrics at the IU School of Medicine and a pediatrician at Riley Hospital for Children. "If the new administration wants to accomplish significant reform, they will need political capital, which they have now," says Dr. Carroll, who is a health services researcher and a Regenstrief Institute affiliated scientist. "We have a government elected with a mandate for change and health care is an area that requires reform. Moreover, with the economy in its current state, with unemployment on the rise, and with health care costs on the ascent, more and more people will not be able to afford insurance or health care. Therefore, more will be in need of reform." According to Dr. Carroll there are now more than 45 million people in America who have not had health insurance for the entire year; almost twice that number lack coverage for a portion of the year. Over the last few years, most of the newly uninsured are from the middle class. As unemployment rises, along with food, utilities and other prices, a growing number of people will be unable to afford health insurance, especially as it gets increasingly expensive.

Health care 1NC
The impact is a new Great Depression. Reform is key to signal long term fiscal solvency and prevent spiraling sell-offs of US debt
Boston Globe, 2-23-09
Budget analysts are worried that a continuing economic crisis will make it impossible to raise sufficient funds from foreign markets to finance the nation's debt. In the last four years, about three-quarters of US debt was purchased by foreign interests, most prominently by China. If other nations lose confidence that the United States will pay its debts, however, some economists fear an international financial crisis could escalate and turn into a worldwide depression. In any case, it is widely expected that debt purchasers will soon demand higher interest rates, which would translate into higher costs for US taxpayers. Obama is being urged by some analysts to start moving toward a balanced budget as soon as possible to send a signal to the world that deficit spending will abate. Yet some analysts are offering Obama conflicting advice, warning him not to repeat what they regard as the mistake of President Franklin Roosevelt, who launched the New Deal but eventually heeded calls to curtail deficit spending, only to see a new recession batter his presidency. A key player in the summit will be Senator Judd Gregg, the New Hampshire Republican who backed out of his commitment to be Obama's commerce secretary and then voted against the stimulus bill. Despite the embarrassment caused by Gregg's about-face, the White House believes that he could be one of its most important allies in the overhaul of Social Security, Medicare, and tax policy. That is because Gregg is the co-sponsor of the measure that would create a bipartisan commission to put together far-reaching recommendations for an up-or-down vote by Congress. In an interview, Gregg said that under such a procedure, the measures could be passed within a year, as long as most of the benefit cuts and tax increases were not slated to take effect until well after the recession is over. "We need an up-or-down vote on a package that will be unquestionably bipartisan and fair," Gregg said, a reference to criticism that Obama's stimulus bill was too partisan. Asked about his hopes for the summit, he said, "It can either be very nice public relations or move the ball down the road on what is an impending fiscal tsunami." Some budget specialists are skeptical. Robert Reischauer, former head of the Congressional Budget Office, said Obama should have seized the opportunity to pair the stimulus bill with the overhaul of Social Security, Medicare, and the tax code. "When you are shoveling out the goodies, you have a greater probability of getting people to sign on to some fiscal diet," said Reischauer, who has been invited to the summit. He said he is worried that nothing will happen on the most difficult issues until political leaders "have a gun at our heads. The system tends to respond only in the face of unavoidable crisis." Analysts across the political spectrum agree that the current path is unsustainable. Unless there is a major budgetary change, federal spending will go from being about 20 percent of the nation's economy to 42 percent in 2050, according to the Concord Coalition. The major reason is that entitlement programs for older Americans are running short of funds. Social Security is slated to pay out more money than it receives by 2017. Obama suggested during his campaign that he might support changing the level of income at which Social Security taxes are calculated. Another frequently mentioned option is raising the retirement age. But any measure will be even more controversial than usual because so many Americans have seen their private retirement plans pummeled by the stock market collapse. Medicare, the government-run healthcare program for older Americans, is already running a deficit, which is expected to increase quickly as baby boomers retire. That is why many analysts are urging Obama to link changes in Medicare with an overhaul of the health system.

Global nuclear war
Mead, 2009 (Walter Russell, the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, “Only Makes You Stronger”, The New Republic, February 4, 2009)
History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other, less reassuring messages as well. If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the Anglophone powers, so has war. The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession; the Seven Years War; the American Revolution; the Napoleonic Wars; the two World Wars; the cold war: The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises. Bad economic times can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression, what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born? The United States may not, yet, decline, but, if we can't get the world economy back on track, we may still have to fight

Justice Gap 1NC

1. Class action lawsuits destroy democracy
Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy, 03
(Martin H. Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy @ Northwestern University, 2003 “Class Actions and the Democratic Difficulty: Rethinking the Intersection of Private Litigation and Public Goals”, 2003 U. Chi. Legal F. 71)
Much of the scholarly commentary has been highly critical of the modern class action. n8 Despite this widespread judicial and scholarly attention, neither courts nor scholars appear to have recognized a fundamental problem with the modern class action: in all too many cases, the modern class action has undermined the foundational precepts of American democracy. It has done so by effectively transforming the essence of the governing substantive law that the class action has been created to enforce. This transformation has come about even though the class action device is not structured for the purpose of altering the underlying law. Thus, controlling substantive law is not transformed through the democratic process of legislative amendment, where the electorate may measure its chosen representatives by how they voted on the proposed revisions of existing law. Rather, this dramatic alteration in governing substantive law arises from, essentially, a form of indirection and subterfuge, by use of a procedural device whose sole legitimate function is the considerably more modest [*74] one of implementing and facilitating the enforcement of existing substantive law. n9
2. Their impact evidence cites a majority of the population must be involved in the government to prevent extinction, but the poor only 12-13% of the country is poor

3. Kills democracy
Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy, 03
(Martin H. Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy @ Northwestern University, 2003 “Class Actions and the Democratic Difficulty: Rethinking the Intersection of Private Litigation and Public Goals”, 2003 U. Chi. Legal F. 71)
In its current form, the faux class action constitutes a wholly improper and unacceptable departure from the fundamental precepts of American democracy, and thus gives rise to what can be described as "the democratic difficulty." The sources of the serious (and ultimately fatal) problems of democratic theory to which the faux class action gives rise are two-fold: (1) Such actions are not what they purport to be--namely, compensatory damage suits--and (2) in any event these disguised bounty hunter actions have never been authorized by the underlying substantive law that such actions purport to enforce. In effect, then, these actions constitute a form of procedural shell game, in which a procedural device that has been designed to do nothing more than facilitate the enforcement of the substantive law's authorization of private [*82] damage suits n37 transforms that private remedial model into a qualitatively different form of remedy that was never part of that substantive law. n38 If the substantive law is to authorize a bounty hunter remedial model as a supplement to or replacement for the pre-existing private damage remedy, the change may not properly be effected through the operation of a procedural device such as Rule 23. Such a dramatic modification of the substantive law through resort to an avowedly procedural device contravenes the fundamental democratic notions of representation and accountability, because the process effectively deceives the electorate. As a result of this deception, the electorate is unable to judge its elected representatives by examining how they voted on these important modifications of enforcement models, because those representatives have never been asked to vote on the issue. The democratic process is substantially undermined as a result.
Justice Gap 1NC
4. An attorney’s entrepreneurial discourage participation in legal process and reduce plaintiffs access to justice
Meinick, J.D. Candidate @ St. Johns University, 08;
(Katie, J.D. Candidate at St. John’s University; Winter 2008, “In Defense of the Class action lawsuit: and examination of the implicit advantages and a response to common criticisms , St. John’s Journal of Legal Commentary, 22 St. John's J.L. Comm. 755, Lexis)
Another major criticism of the class action is that class action attorneys lack an actual client to constrain them. n78 In traditional forms of litigation, the attorney advocates on behalf of the client, but it is the client who makes the ultimate decisions regarding the representation. n79 In such a scenario, the client can be seen as a monitor, ensuring the attorney engages in his legal duties to the best of his abilities and is not sidetracked by any personal interest he has riding on the litigation. n80 Even in a contingency fee representation, the client can tell the attorney to reject settlement offers in favor of waiting out a higher offer or continuing on to litigation. n81 Such a relationship does not exist within the class action context. n82 In such litigation, attorneys do not have a single client to whom they must answer. n83 In fact, the client in class action litigation is an amorphous group and the attorney is ultimately responsible to the group as a whole, not to any individual member. n84 Without a specific client to keep him in check, the existence [*771] of the entrepreneurial attorney has emerged. n85 Such an attorney exists to further his own self-interests as opposed to furthering the interests of his client. n86 Traditional agency theory describes the agency relationship as "a contract under which one or more persons (the principal(s)) engage another person (the agent) to perform some service on their behalf, which involves delegating some decision making authority to the agent." n87 Under such circumstances, if per chance the interests of the two parties diverge, the monitoring by the principal serves to keep the agent on track. n88 The effectiveness of this monitoring relationship ultimately depends on "the observability of the agent's performance." n89 In the traditional attorney client relationship, monitoring can be difficult because the client (the principal) is often ignorant of litigable claims and defenses, and therefore not always able to perform the necessary supervisory functions. n90 Regardless of the difficult nature of the task, the client is at least given the opportunity to observe his agent at work and to assert his own opinions when he desires. n91 [*772] Within the class action context, the ideal of agency theory becomes even more strained. n92 In large-scale small-claim litigation, the lack of a substantial stake in the litigation serves to deter many from wanting to take on the extra responsibility of serving as a litigation monitor. n93 Even when someone has agreed to be the named plaintiff, he often wants to lend no more than his name to a case in which he stands to recover only a nominal amount. n94 This creates a situation where someone who has been tasked with representing the voice of the class fails to follow through with the responsibility, again leaving the class attorney as the one driving the lawsuit. n95 Additionally, within the class action context, members of the class are often unaware that they have a stake in the litigation until the settlement has been reached and therefore never have a chance to weigh in on the litigation strategy. n96 Perhaps most disturbing to an outsider is the fact that, even if someone (besides the named plaintiff) wanted to assume a stronger role within a class action litigation, it is the attorney's responsibility to advocate for the best interests of the class as a whole, and not any one [*773] individual. n97 Resultantly, the attorney could potentially refuse to listen to a class member at will, if he feels the class member's wishes conflict with the interests of the class as a whole.

Environmental Injustice 1NC

They have it backwards – the hazardous siting was there first, attracting lower income individuals. This only gives the impression of environmental racism – their studies are flawed.
Glasgow 5 (Joshua, Yale Law School JD candidate, Buffalo Environmental Law Journal, 13 Buff. Envt’l L.J. 69, Fall, ln)
In addition to courtroom difficulties, the environmental justice movement was challenged by a number of studies in the mid-1990s challenging the evidence of discriminatory siting and exposure. [*76] An influential University of Massachusetts study conducted in 1994 examined over five hundred hazardous waste facilities and found no evidence of discriminatory siting. 27 Additionally, scholars challenged the earlier studies' methodologies, including the sample selection, the definition of minority, the geographic scope examined, and the failure to control for other variables. 28 In a series of articles, Vicki Been set forth a particularly powerful critique of environmental justice studies. 29 Been notes that most studies examined the contemporary makeup of a neighborhood impacted by a LULU, not its makeup at the time of siting. 30 This method ignores the possibility that a LULU would lower nearby housing prices, causing affluent residents to move away. These residents would be replaced by lower-income individuals, attracted by the lower housing prices. As a result of these market dynamics, even LULUs located in a wealthy neighborhood could later become surrounded by the poor. 31 This "chicken-or-the-egg" dilemma has plagued the environmental justice literature. 32
Correlation vs. Causation. Even EPA studies conclude that lower property values are the real explanation. Their studies are driven solely by ideology, not facts.
Payne 00 (Henry: writer for New York Times, "Green redlining: how rules against "environmental racism" hurt poor minorities most of all," __ articles/mi_m1568/is_n5_v30/ ai_21141903/print?tag=artBody; col1__)
No matter what form the administration's environmental justice policy finally takes, the underlying question is whether environmental racism exists at all. What is perhaps most disturbing about the administration's crusade is that it has for years ignored evidence - much of it from the EPA itself that minorities are not disproportionately affected by industrial waste. As with the issues of secondhand smoke and global warming, the administration's policy is driven not by facts but by ideology. In a comprehensive survey of studies examining the surrounding demographics of plant sites, Washington University's Huebner concluded this year that "the evidence relied on by environmental justice advocates is flawed....In particular, the dynamics of the housing market prove a plausible alternative explanation for the disparities observed in the current location of industrial facilities. Recent evidence indicates that minority and poor populations tend to locate near industrial facilities after the facilities are located, possibly due to lower property values. "Most damning, however, have been studies by the EPA itself. Two such studies were obtained by David Mastio of The Detroit News. The EPA studies were conducted to confirm the link between pollution and race found in the United Church of Christ report and other studies. In both cases, however, the EPA's exhaustive survey of the communities surrounding 1,234 Superfund sites - some of the most polluted land in the country - turned up no evidence of disparate impact on minorities. To the contrary, the studies found that the populations most exposed to these toxic sites were white and middle class. For example, in EPA Region 5, which includes the heavily industrialized Rust Belt, all minorities were underrepresented in areas around Superfund sites. But because the EPA's studies contradicted emerging administration policy on environmental racism, they were never made public. Lacking evidence for their cause, environmental justice activists have used scare tactics to turn residents against proposed plants. In Claiborne Parish, Louisiana, Greenpeace and Earth Justice used a campaign of fear (and exploited Clinton's 1994 executive order) to torpedo a proposed $855 million uranium enrichment plant last April.The foundation of the administration's support of environmental racism claims seems to be a belief that minorities are permanent victims. It is a theme that runs through press coverage of the issue as well. A July National Journal cover story, for example, examined the Shintech case in detail by talking to plant managers and opposition groups. But the reporter did not once consult a black member of the St. James Citizens Coalition, or Janice Dickerson, or a black parish councilman for their opinion of the plant. The articles assumption is that blacks near the plant must be victims because they are black.

Environmental Justice 1NC
3. Injustice is inevitable without strong administrative land reforms
Department for International Development: Government Department responsible for promoting development and the reduction of poverty, November 2002 “Better livelihoods for poor people: The role of Land Policy”
Poor policies, inappropriate legal frameworks and weak administration mean many governments are ill equipped to provide land for the poor in cities. Cumbersome planning and building standards that are blatantly infringed frequently combine with hazardous topography. Many poor people have no choice but to take what land they can through informal or illegal means. Conditions in poor areas of cities are unsafe and unhealthy, services are inadequate and people face the continual threat of eviction. It is vital that work to strengthen land rights in cities is linked to improved urban and regional planning.
4. Alternative causalities – racism, economic, post-materialism, governmental inefficiency
Alka Sapat, Jaap J. Vos, and Khi V. Thai , a School of Public Administration, Florida Atlantic University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, U.S.A.b Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Florida Atlantic University, Davie, Florida, U.S.A. International Journal of Public Administration, Volume 25, Issue 2 & 3 March 2002 , (pages 143 – 168)
Environmental justice is a major issue today and of interest to citizens, administrators, and scholars of public administration. In this introduction, we review the emergence of the environmental justice movement and discuss the development of the field by presenting an overview of the literature and existent research on environmental justice. This research has focused to a large extent on siting issues and on the causes and explanations of environmental equity. In particular, five causes or explanations of environmental injustice have been emphasized in the literature: (a) race; (b) economic and market factors; (c) political and administrative issues; (d) attitudinal issues; and (e) post-materialism. We review the major pieces of research and evidence in these areas and compare and contrast the explanations of environmental injustice. for the most part we find that there is considerable controversy over the different explanations and causes of environmental injustice. In the third section of the paper, we highlight some of the issues that have not been explored so far and the unfulfilled gaps, in academic research on environmental justice issues. We conclude by presenting a brief synopsis of the articles in this symposium.

5. Status quo solves – shift towards hybrid cars ensures decreasing emissions levels
Cohen 01 [Bonner R., Lexington Institute, “Air Quality’s Benefactors,” For the Record, Summer 2001, regv24n2/fortherecord.pdf
Matthew E. Kahn’s discussion of the effects of cleaner air in the Los Angeles basin adds an interesting twist to the debate over environmental justice (“The Beneficiaries of Clean Air Regulation,” Regulation, Vol. 24, No. 1). While air pollution levels in predominantly black and Hispanic areas were markedly higher than in white neighborhoods in 1980, Kahn’s analysis shows that the gap has closed considerably over the past two decades. The improvements in air quality in the Los Angeles basin, he notes, are primarily the result of expensive anti-pollution devices on newer cars, purchased mostly by the area’s more affluent residents. Inner city residents, it turns out, are the chief beneficiaries of the increasingly successful efforts to deal with the L.A. basin’s chronic air quality problems. I strongly suspect that Professor Kahn could find similar patterns in other urban areas, as the rising tide of technology-driven air-quality improvements lifts all boats, including those anchored in inner cities. The Environmental Protection Agency, which is still mulling over a set of environmental justice policies designed to “protect” minorities from pollution, would do well to take note of developments in Los Angeles and elsewhere. As is so often the case, the problem it has decided to address appears well on its way to being solved. This is happening without the restrictions on business and industrial activities in minority communities, which are at the heart of EPA’s proposals to bring about environmental justice.
Solvency 1NC
1. Class Action Lawsuits fail to compensate litigants
Miller, student @ Brigham Young University, 09
(Chris H. Miller, student @ Brigham Young University, 09, “THE ADAPTIVE AMERICAN JUDICIARY: FROM CLASSICAL ADJUDICATION TO CLASS ACTION LITIGATION”, 72 Alb. L. Rev. 117, Lexis)

Third, Martin Redish identifies the problem of individual justice. n120 Since class action litigation is typically initiated by private attorneys seeking personal economic gain, perverse incentives to settle often emerge, usually at the expense of class members. n121 The contingent fee structure of class action adjudication provides attorneys with a particular percentage of the award, regardless of the amount of effort spent on the case. n122 Consequently, attorneys often elect to settle for less than they could probably acquire in court, in order to avoid the costs of taking a particular case to trial, which results in huge payouts for attorneys in return for small investments of time and substantially smaller rewards for actual litigants. n123 Additionally, Redish argues that an enormous number of class action lawsuits result in coupon settlements, or awards given in discounts for services and merchandise. n124 Coupons resulting from these settlements, however, are frequently unhelpful to individual litigants and cost the defendant virtually nothing, since they can simply offer their goods and services at the discounted production price. n125 Additionally, the completion of complex forms is often required to qualify for the settled coupons, which constructs yet another barrier to relief for litigants. n126 As a result, class action settlements often fail to satisfactorily achieve the primary goals of victim compensation and corporate deterrence. n127
2. 1AC solvency evidence only in context of business regulation- they read no specific evidence on how
3. Class action lawsuits don’t solve their harms- legislative enforcement is necessary
Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy, 03
(Martin H. Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy @ Northwestern University, 2003 “Class Actions and the Democratic Difficulty: Rethinking the Intersection of Private Litigation and Public Goals”, 2003 U. Chi. Legal F. 71)

Where the government wishes to deter or punish unlawful behavior in a more direct and reliable manner, it has several options available to it. Instead of, or in addition to, the private compensatory remedy, a legislature may utilize any permutation or combination of a variety of conceivable remedial models, including criminal enforcement, civil penalties, and administrative regulation. For purposes of democratic theory, there are several key points to note about the substantive law's choice of remedial model. To be sure, a legislative choice of behavioral proscription may be of enormous political import. Normative issues of social policy often turn on the legislative selection of specific acts to be prohibited or restricted. But also of potentially great social and political significance is the legislative choice of how to implement and enforce those directives--for example, whether a judicially enforceable compensatory remedy will be created, whether relief will be confined to the imposition of criminal penalties, or whether civil fines will also be authorized. Unless a particular substantive law authorizes enforcement through private victim compensation, the entire structure of private rights compensatory adjudication is generally rendered irrelevant. n20 On the other [*77] hand, where a statute provides for enforcement exclusively through victim compensation, enforcement of the statute's behavioral norms by any other method inevitably and profoundly alters the statute's substantive directives

Solvency 1NC

4. Other things in the ways
Barnett, President of Legal Services Corporation, 07
(Helaine M. Barnett, President of Legal Services Corporation, June 2007, “Documenting the Justice Gap In America The Current Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-Income Americans”, pdf)
More broadly, the methodology does not capture people with serious legal needs who did not contact any legal aid provider for a variety of possible reasons (data documenting the frequency of these reasons for not seeking legal help appears below, under Methodology #2): People who need legal help frequently do not know about the availability of civil legal assistance or their potential eligibility for legal services. People who need legal help and know that they meet the eligibility requirements for free legal services may not seek help from the program because they believe (often correctly) that the program will not be able to assist them.9 Other barriers, such as geographical distance and isolation, low literacy, physical or mental disability, limited English proficiency, culture and ethnic background, and apprehension about the courts and the legal system, also pose impediments.
5. LSC lacks substantial resources to help the poor-every one out of two people are turned down even if eligible
Nieves, staff writer for Washington Post, 05
(Evelyn Nieves, staff writer for Washington Post, 10-15-2005, “80% of Poor Lack Civil Legal Aid, Study Says”, wp-dyn/content/article/2005/ 10/14/AR2005101401861.html)
At least 80 percent of low-income Americans who need civil legal assistance do not receive any, in part because legal aid offices in this country are so stretched that they routinely turn away qualified prospective clients, a new study shows. Roughly 1 million cases per year are being rejected because legal aid programs lack the resources to handle them, according to the study, "Documenting the Justice Gap in America," by the Legal Services Corp. (LSC), which funds 143 legal aid programs across the country. The 1 million cases do not include the many qualified people who do not ask a legal aid program for help -- because they do not know the programs exist, they do not know they qualify or they assume that the help is not available to them, the study shows. Nor does the figure include people who received some service -- including simple advice -- but not the level of service that they actually need, the study found. Nationally, on average, low-income households experienced approximately one civil legal need per year. These legal needs arise out of the everyday problems of poor people -- matters relating to family law, housing, employment, government benefits or consumer problems, according to the LSC. Left unresolved, these problems can affect and cost society much more than the expense of legal services to address them, LSC President Helaie M. Barnett said. But only 1 in 5 or less of all problems identified is addressed, either with the help of a private (paid or pro bono) or legal aid lawyer, the study found. For every client served by an LSC-funded program, at least one person seeking help will be turned down. Poor people also have few options when it comes to legal help. The study determined that there is one legal aid lawyer per 6,861 low-income clients vs. one lawyer for every 525 persons in the general population. Legal aid programs served slightly fewer than 1 million people in 2004, with family problems representing the largest category of cases (383,484). Family problems -- including domestic violence and abuse, custody issues, and problems involving social service agencies -- also represented the largest number of documented unmet cases (504,312). Housing problems were second, while income issues were third on the list of cases met and fifth on the list of problems that were unmet, after consumer issues and miscellaneous legal problems.