Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9325

Bill Overview

Title: EQUAL Defense Act of 2022

Description: This bill establishes and modifies certain programs that support the delivery of public defense services (i.e., legal services for criminal defendants who cannot afford counsel). Specifically, the bill directs the Department of Justice (DOJ) to award grants to state and local governments, tribal organizations, and public defender offices for public defense. A grant recipient must use the grant to establish a data collection process, develop workload limits, and satisfy specified compensation requirements (e.g., pay parity between public defenders and prosecutors). The bill also directs DOJ to award grants to nonprofits and government organizations to train public defenders, court-appointed attorneys, and contract attorneys. Additionally, a state that receives Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program funds must annually submit to DOJ information related to the legal representation of defendants in criminal cases. Finally, it reauthorizes through FY2026 the student loan repayment program for prosecutors and public defenders and otherwise revises the program, including by increasing the maximum benefit amount.

Sponsors: Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1]

Target Audience

Population: People who cannot afford legal defense services

Estimated Size: 2000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Mechanic (Chicago, IL)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I felt overwhelmed during my last case. More resources and training for public defenders would have made a difference.
  • Better pay might help retain talented defenders, improving future clients' experiences.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 5 4
Year 3 6 4
Year 5 6 4
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 8 6

Public School Teacher (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Better equipped public defenders would have helped my brother's case significantly.
  • This policy could change lives if implemented correctly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Public Defender (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could finally address the workload concerns we all face.
  • Salary parity with prosecutors is crucial to retain talent.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Retired Factory Worker (Houston, TX)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My grandson's lawyer seemed overworked and underprepared.
  • If this policy helps bring more resources, it might help children like him.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 8 6

Nonprofit Organizer (Miami, FL)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Public defender support is vital for fair trials.
  • Long-term benefits will be seen if sustained funding remains.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Barista (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't know much about public defenders, but anything that makes the system fairer sounds good.
  • It seems like a positive change, but I'm unaffected directly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Law Enforcement Officer (New York, NY)

Age: 50 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've seen firsthand the impact of underfunded public defense.
  • It could lead to more balanced cases. Support for their workload seems necessary.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Retired Librarian (Detroit, MI)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Equality in the legal field cannot be achieved without resources.
  • Public defenders need our support for the justice system to work fairly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Restaurant Owner (Kansas City, MO)

Age: 36 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe equal justice requires adequate resources on both sides of the court.
  • Volunteers can only do so much; this funding might fill gaps left by overburdened public defenders.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 9 7

Tech Worker (Seattle, WA)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any relief in student loans would be impactful on recruitment and retention in public defense.
  • I might have considered a public defense career if such support existed earlier.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 2: $260000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $310000000)

Year 3: $270000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $320000000)

Year 5: $290000000 (Low: $240000000, High: $340000000)

Year 10: $330000000 (Low: $280000000, High: $380000000)

Year 100: $700000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $800000000)

Key Considerations