A national group of Christian lawyers is appealing to church leaders to join them in lobbying against the bankruptcy reform bill introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Ia.Despite Grassley's moral fortitude on popular Christian hot-buttons, he's jumped at every chance to screw individuals since he was elected in 1980. He's voted against eliminating the "marriage penalty" for married taxpayers. He's voted to repeal safety standards for assembly-line workers. He's voted to limit appeals in death-penalty cases, even when new evidence may prove the innocence of those on death row. He voted against minimum wage increases. He... well. You get it.
The lawyers say the legislation runs contrary to the forgiveness of debt and charity required by the Bible.
"As Christian attorneys, we strongly believe that it was never God's intention to create a society where indebtedness was a crime or a badge of dishonor," Christian members of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys wrote in a letter sent Feb. 26 to hundreds of church leaders across the nation.
The lawyers note that in the Old Testament, God did not outlaw borrowing and lending, but provided that loans would become discharged every seven years.
In response, Grassley said Congress could not be bound by biblical mandates because "the Constitution does not provide for a theocracy."
"I can't listen to Christian lawyers because I would be imposing the Bible on a diverse population," Grassley said. "I'll bet those lawyers wouldn't want us to impose the principles of forgiving debt every seven years. If that were the law, nobody would loan them money."
The bankruptcy legislation being debated by the Senate is intended to make it harder for people to walk away from their credit card and other debts. But legal specialists say the proposed law leaves open an increasingly popular loophole that lets wealthy people protect substantial assets from creditors even after filing for bankruptcy.posted by airguitar at 7:40 AM on March 9, 2005
Asset protection trusts have become increasingly popular in recent years among physicians, who fear large medical malpractice awards, and corporate executives, whose assets are at greater peril now because of new laws.
...provisions in [S.256] would require the debtor's attorney to certify the accuracy of the debtor's bankruptcy schedules... Existing federal rules already require all lawyers--including bankruptcy attorneys--to certify that their pleadings are supported by the facts, but Section 102 of [S.256] would create a newer and harsher standard just for debtors' bankruptcy attorneys. By holding a debtor's attorney personally liable for any inaccuracies in the client's schedules that lead to the dismissal of the Chapter 7 petition or its conversion to a Chapter 13, the bill would force the attorney to independently verify all of the client's factual representations and would require the attorney to conduct a costly investigation and appraisal of all assets listed on the client's schedules.posted by airguitar at 10:21 AM on March 9, 2005
...provisions in [S.256] would require attorneys to certify the debtor's ability to make payments under a reaffirmation agreement. Under current law, a debtor may choose to reaffirm certain debts--and retain liability for those debts--if the attorney certifies that the decision is voluntary and will not create undue hardship for the debtor. By requiring the attorney to also certify the debtor's ability to pay the reaffirmed debt, Section 203(a) of [S.256] would force attorneys to conduct costly and time-consuming audits of their clients' finances.
...provisions in [S.256] would require bankruptcy attorneys to identify and advertise themselves as "debt relief agencies" and then comply with a host of new regulations. Section 227-229 of [S.256] would interfere with the attorney-client relationship by requiring all debtors' bankruptcy attorneys--and many non-bankruptcy attorneys--to provide their clients with lengthy written disclosure statements containing government-approved legal advice on bankruptcy law while prohibiting the attorneys from giving their clients certain proper pre-bankruptcy planning advice. These provisions would also have a chilling effect on lawyers choosing to represent debtors by requiring all of their newsletters, seminars and advertising materials to include the awkward and misleading statement that "We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code."
These three attorney liability provisions, taken together, would have a substantial negative impact on the availability of quality legal counsel in bankruptcy and would result in thousands of pro se debtors. These provisions would discourage many attorneys from agreeing to represent debtors at all, while dramatically increasing the fees and expenses of clients who are able to obtain legal representation. In addition, these provisions would strongly discourage lawyers from providing essential pro bono bankruptcy services. Unless they are removed, these provisions pose a serious threat to the efficient operation of the bankruptcy system.
« Older Build an Igloo.... | In the South Seas there is a c... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Gilbert at 7:23 PM on March 8, 2005