Alaska Has Something to Be Proud Of: It Ain't Sarah Palin!

Lawmaker wants Alaska's first medical, law schools

FAIRBANKS, Alaska (AP) — An Alaska lawmaker has pledged to add schools of medicine and law to a state that has neither.

State Rep. Scott Kawasaki says he'll file legislation before the Alaska Assembly reconvenes in January that would create the graduate programs.

The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reports that Alaska is the only state without a law school, and one of the few states without a medical school.

Kawasaki says Alaska suffers from doctor shortages and high legal and health care costs.

University of Alaska system spokeswoman Kate Ripley says adding graduate programs would require an analysis of student demand and the work force needed to staff both schools.

***

Dear Rep. Scott Kawasaki,

Please leave well enough alone.  Your state has a relatively small and wealthy population.  Don't you like it that way?  Adding a bunch of poor law grads won't make legal fees more affordable--it will glut your legal system with malpractice cases and leave many Alaskans with below par legal representation. You will have an influx of law students to your state that will bring down the median income upon graduating.  They will have no real skills to contribute to the Alaskan Economy.  I can see through your lies, Mr. Representative.  You obviously want a cash cow in the state, but I hope that you will be able to live with the repercussions of your actions.  It's one thing to hear about homeless crazies dying in the harsh Alaskan cold--but a whole different thing to deal with the over-educated and underemployed law school grads taxing your meager welfare system.  Think better of this whole plan.  There isn't a state in the Nation that needs a law school. Your state is better for not having one.  

Sincerely,

Angel the Lawyer

Law Students Behaving Badly: Using Their Knowledge for the Greater Good

So, does the bouncer have to worry about a lawsuit?
Thanks tipster!
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

USNWR: Don't Overemphasize Ranking When Choosing Law School

Kaplan did a study to determine what dumb lemmings use to choose a law school.  The report revealed:

30 percent of test takers say that a law school's ranking is the most critical factor, followed by geographic location at 24 percent; academic programming at 19 percent; and affordability at 12 percent. Only 8 percent of respondents consider a law school's job placement statistics to be the most important factor.

USNWR isn't happy with the overemphasis on their rankings stating:
The U.S. News Best Law Schools rankings spotlight the country's academically excellent law school programs in many areas. However, they should be used by prospective students as just one tool in the process for picking the best school for them. Many other factors that cannot be measured need to go into such an important decision, including the overall cost, location, course offerings, school culture, job prospects, advising or mentoring opportunities, and campus life.

I read this tidbit as follows:  give all law schools a chance!

Yah right.  Ranking is the only thing that matters to Big Law--arguably the ultimate end result for many law students.  Let's go through the factors that USNWR focuses on:

overall cost: important.  But one must note that the cost has no correlation whatsoever of cost with quality of education.  So you could pay out the ass for a TTTT education and pay less for a T25 education.  Or you could pay very little for an unaccredited school, which is definitely worse than paying for Harvard or Yale.

location: important, but no so much if you go to a T14.  A T14 degree will travel all over the United States.  However, a TTTT education is arguably a regional degree--if that.  Case in point, New York Law School.  Probably not worth it in New York, and worth less outside of New York.

course offerings: Not important at all.  Law school is boring and bland, whatever class you take.  Furthermore, many of the classes listed in the catalog are not offered EVER.  Or they are offered so infrequently, that you will never get into the class.  Also, although your GPA is supremely important--employers don't give two shits what classes you take.  If you take many classes on entertainment law or labor law, that does not equate a job in entertainment law or labor law--because no one cares.

school culture:  Who cares and how are you to figure that out without going?  My Tier One school advertises itself as being a small and intimate law school environment with friendly professors.  I even spoke to hired guns (students) that lied about the school's culture.  It was small, but that's where the description ended.  I never met so many snobby students and professors in my life.

job prospects:  Once again, with law schools lying through their teeth about employment stats, how are you to know.  The only way you can be certain that you have job prospects is by going to a T14 or, arguably, a T8 school.

advising or mentoring opportunities:  Once again, who the hell cares.  Even the shittiest of the shit law schools will claim to have mentoring opportunities.  After all, there is no shortage of graduates.  It's dumb to make a decision based on this.  If you go to a T14, it may be unnecessary--because you'll have something better, a well-connected alumnae base.

campus life:  You already went to college.  Grow the fuck up.  I don't care if Harvard or Yale have the lamest student life out there--that is the appropriate law school to go to.  This should not be the basis of any adult decision.

Maybe USNWR is trying to take the heat off of their roll in the demise of tens of thousands of people every year.  Maybe they feel badly that TTTT schools get the shaft.  This is a load of bull honky and is to be disregarded.

Yale of fail.

What the hell is this snake thing?

Is a Prestigious College Worth It? More Importantly, Would You Believe What These People Have to Say About It?

With the state of unemployment today, one must ask whether a college education is worth it?  Since most people view college as a non-negotiable, the question becomes; is an Elite College worth it?
So, once again, the ineffectual New York Times examines the issue by quoting studies conducted by... guess who?  Elite college educators.  Should we buy their self-serving studies?  Here's some of the notable points:

...One of those authors, Scott L. Thomas, a sociologist who is a professor of educational studies at Claremont, said high school students and their parents should take any attempt to apply broad generalizations to such personal choices with a grain of salt.

“Prestige does pay,” Mr. Thomas said in an interview. “But prestige costs, too. The question is, is the cost less than the added return?”

Among the most cited research on the subject — a paper by economists from the RAND Corporation and Brigham Young and Cornell Universities — found that “strong evidence emerges of a significant economic return to attending an elite private institution, and some evidence suggests this premium has increased over time.”

“Education is a long-run investment,” said Professor Eide, chairman of the economics department at Brigham Young, “It may be more painful to finance right now. People may be more hesitant to go into debt because of the recession. In my opinion, they should be looking over the long run of their child’s life.”

I'm happy that RAND was involved because it's relatively objective.  Of course, it should be noted that "RAND is also the home to the Frederick S. Pardee RAND Graduate School, one of the original graduate programs in public policy and the first to offer a Ph.D."  So, I guess they are in on it too.  So, I credit them and discredit them in one paragraph. Lovely.
I don't know who is better suited to provide an unbiased study of the actual value of an elite college education.  However, I'm certain that educators will never tell you that an education, elite or not, is not worth the cost.  It's funny that these educators are cited in an article that directly affects them. It would be comical and absurd if car manufacturers were quoted in a story claiming that expensive cars are safer than inexpensive cars.  So why does an article like this make it into the esteemed New York Times? I'll tell you why, because we respect educators and colleges.  We expect that they will be honest and truthful when they have proven to be anything but.  Just look at the way they rip off students.  If you remember, in the post I did about No Sucker Left Behind, it's apparent that colleges see their students as an ATM.  A few examples, once again:

1. Bait and Switch Scholarship: The first year that I attended FYU (Fuck You University), I was given a scholarship based on ... hell, I didn't know. I had good grades in high school, so I assumed it was based on merit.  I filled out a FAFSA, and I got a scholarship.  At the end of first year, I filled out another FAFSA. I had a 4.0 (all of college actually)--so I assumed I would get the same financial package, but the scholarship was gone--POOF.  It was gone. I asked about it and I was told that it just wasn't available to me anymore. Classic bait and switch.  Give the freshman a great financial aid packages and pull out the rug from under them and they are stuck.  What are they going to do, transfer?

2.  FYU had an average sports team.  One year, the school made it to finals or playoffs or whatever they are called, and the next year, tuition went up by 20%.  As it turns out, the reason why schools give a shit about their sports team is NOT school spirit.  Rather, it's the greatest marketing tool ever.  If the team is doing great, then you can justify a hike in tuition.  Oh yah, alumna love to donate money to their schools when the sports team is doing well.

3.  Did you ever wonder why vital classes were offered only once a year, and not in the summer?  Why can't organic chemistry be offered every semester when it's the prerequisite to so many majors?  It's not JUST because the professors are lazy shits.  It's also because, if you don't fix your schedule perfectly, you're forced to enroll for one additional semester. I was wondering why so many people graduate from college in 5 years, rather than 4.  That's why!

In the end, I don't even care what the premise of the article is.  Educators would never discount a college education altogether, as they should, because they make too much perpetrating a fraud on America. The issue shouldn't be whether an elite college is worth it, it should be whether a college education is worth it.  They are nearly all over priced. College is a great experience, it's true.  But it doesn't make you more marketable.  It's a luxury, i.e. reserved for people who can afford it--but you'll never hear it from the educators.  Who would put themselves out of business?

Nanny State?

I was watching Fox News.  Yes, I watch it sometimes. I also listen to 770 a.m. so that I can get a daily shot of adrenaline.  I get so angry, but I do it nonetheless.  I'm sure my blood pressure is super high as a result, but I'll never know since I don't have health insurance.  I have three jobs, but no health insurance--it's great.  So, I would love to share the clip with you, but I can't find it.  The title was "Nanny State." There were four talking heads criticizing young people--ages 16 to 24--for being unemployed.  Apparently 1 in 5 people in that age group are unemployed.  That's a whopping 20%.  The reason why they're unemployed is not the obvious reason, because they are no jobs.  Rather, it's because young people can easily move in with their parents upon graduating, can apply for food stamps and are now under their parents' health insurance until they are 26.  So, it's because they're lazy.  One of the guests said that young people would do well by digging ditches like immigrants (his words, not mine) to learn a valuable lesson about life.  Then, the ugly guy from capiltalistpig.com said that it's the minimum wage that's keeping young people unemployed.  I started to nod my head, thinking that the minimum wage is too low for young people to sustain themselves.  NOPE.  It's too high, so that small business can't afford to hire more young people.  Of course, I'm no genius, but I would have loved to be on the show to state the obvious:  young people can't find jobs because older people (like me) are taking those jobs.  Why would you hire a 22 year old to do a job if you can find a 30 something year old with a proven track record to do the same.  Furthermore, most young people don't want to go away to college and then move back in with their parents.  Living with your parents is demoralizing.  Young people don't want to live with their parents.  We need to trust that young people, if given a living wage, will quickly move out of their parents' home.  And as for food stamps: if you've applied for food stamps--please tell me here.  I want to hear about it. I know many people who are unemployed and they have not applied for food stamps--they eat lots of tuna and oodles of noodles and manage, somehow.  We don't have unemployment of 20% in the 16 to 24 age range because young people have too much of a safety net.  What parent, in any crisis, would allow their children to become homeless if they didn't have to?

There's a major disconnect in this nation.  People are so caught up in their own success to understand why others are not doing so well.  Walk a mile in someone else's shoes before you criticize and berate others.

Jonathan Hoenig-the Capitalist Pig.

Kenneth Starr did What???! Wall of Shame: Jonathan Bristol

I had to google Kenneth Starr when I read this story.  Nope, it's not the same Kenneth Starr, the one who almost ousted our President and the one who was most recently the President of Baylor University and the former professor at both George Mason Law and Chapman law and the Former Dean of Pepperdine Law School.  His name has been hijacked by another Ponzi Schemer.  This is old news, because it happened in May, but here it is:

The SEC previously charged Starr, Starr Investment Advisors LLC, and Starr & Company LLC with violating securities laws pertaining to custody of clients' assets and misusing client funds to buy a multi-million dollar luxury condominium on Manhattan's Upper East Side, among other things.

Starr was arrested in May and indicted on 23 counts of fraud and money laundering involving $59 million. Starr was a financial adviser to several celebrities including Uma Thurman and Martin Scorsese. 

What's newsworthy today is that his attorney was charged with taking part in this crazy scheme.  His attorney, Jonathan Bristol, is being accused of using his attorney trust accounts to as conduits for Starr's clients' stolen money.   The SEC charged him today.

Bristol had a legal and professional responsibility not to assist Ken Starr in conduct that he knew was unlawful," said George S. Canellos, director of the SEC's New York Regional Office. "Bristol crossed the line from lawyer to conspirator when he failed to safeguard funds entrusted to him, helped Starr steal client money, and lied to the victims to perpetuate the scheme."

According to the SEC, more than $25 million belonging to Starr's clients flowed through Bristol's attorney trust accounts. Without his clients' authorization, Starr would transfer their funds into the attorney trust accounts. Bristol would then transfer the stolen funds to Starr and his two companies for Starr's personal use.

Is that money laundering?  I wonder what his cut was... Hmmm.  

“College essentially provided them with nothing”...

Sound familiar?  Well, given the difficulty of finding a job as a college or professional school grad--it should be.  Except this statement was made by a Chinese man, Zhang Ming, in China. Yes, the world's biggest super power, China, took a pass-go card through middle class prosperity to over-education and under-stimulation. And you thought this was an American problem.  Think again!

In a kind of cruel reversal, China’s old migrant class — uneducated villagers who flocked to factory towns to make goods for export — are now in high demand, with spot labor shortages and tighter government oversight driving up blue-collar wages.

But the supply of those trained in accounting, finance and computer programming now seems limitless, and their value has plunged. Between 2003 and 2009, the average starting salary for migrant laborers grew by nearly 80 percent; during the same period, starting pay for college graduates stayed the same, although their wages actually decreased if inflation is taken into account.

The latter paragraph sounds much like what we have going on in the good ol' U.S.A.  Of course, we shipped our factory jobs to China--so there is no comparison in that respect.  Arguably, the college grads in China have it worse though.  Since their parents are farmers and factory workers, they can't take their children in when they fall on their over-educated faces.  Instead, they are living in a modern day ghetto of intelligencia:

Liu Yang, a coal miner’s daughter, arrived in the capital this past summer with a freshly printed diploma from Datong University, $140 in her wallet and an air of invincibility. 

Her first taste of reality came later the same day, as she lugged her bags through a ramshackle neighborhood, not far from the Olympic Village, where tens of thousands of other young strivers cram four to a room.

Unable to find a bed and unimpressed by the rabbit warren of slapdash buildings, Ms. Liu scowled as the smell of trash wafted up around her. “Beijing isn’t like this in the movies,” she said.

Wow.  That makes your momma's basement sound lovely, doesn't it.  In china, they call their unemployed graduates "ants":

Chinese sociologists have come up with a new term for educated young people who move in search of work like Ms. Liu: the ant tribe. It is a reference to their immense numbers — at least 100,000 in Beijing alone — and to the fact that they often settle into crowded neighborhoods, toiling for wages that would give even low-paid factory workers pause.

We call educated people "poor." It's easier and requires no sociology report.

It's nice to know that we're not alone.  China took our factory jobs, but is suffering nonetheless.  I said it before and I'll say it again--an education is a luxury that many can't afford, especially when it results in lesser earning power.  It's the possibly the worst investment out there.  Connections will get you farther.


Thanks tipster!

Take that Professors! Finally They Feel the Pain...

Start at 10:00 or just read this article.

Stanford Law Launches Another Study of the Legal Profession. YAWN.

Does anyone believe that Stanford Law School with research support from the Sidley Austin Foundation will produce anything that will rock the boat in the legal profession? Here is a description for our non-lawyer readers who have never heard of Sidley Austin and its foundation (i.e. tax relief and marketing tool) :

About the Sidley Austin Foundation

In 2006, the international law firm Sidley Austin LLP formed the Sidley Austin Foundation. The Foundation was created to provide organizations in need with the means to support their philanthropic goals. Since the creation of the Foundation, the Foundation has made donations to such organizations as Legal Aid Society, Equal Justice Initiative, Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, among other legal interest charitable organizations. The Foundation also supports a range of nonprofit activities throughout the nation.

Back to the what they plan to learn from the study:

The objective of the multi-year study is to describe and understand the state of the profession, including trends and emerging developments. The study will seek to develop policy recommendations to help law firms adapt their business models to better meet the needs of their clients and of a rapidly changing legal market. It will also consider the implications of these changes for legal education.

This sounds like another biased Biglaw study in conjunction with a top 3 law school to look for ways where Biglaw firms and top law schools can adapt (i.e. continue to make their millions while ignoring deferred and laid off lawyers with $200k student loans) to the imploding legal market rather than find solutions to stop the bleeding. Their findings will likely not reflect the broader legal market, the offshoring of legal jobs, and the implications the changing market will have for the thousands of unemployed attorneys, current law schools students, and recent graduates.

Some of our unemployed readers may also be all too familiar with Sidley Austin as they laid off 229 of their employees last year. Sure sounds like a great firm to trust to produce unbiased, statistically accurate numbers and recommendations to build a better business model, right?

Columbia Drug Dealer Still Wants to Pursue Dream to be a Lawyer!

Ivy 'weeder' eyes law school

By DOUGLAS MONTERO

Last Updated: 3:04 AM, December 9, 2010

Posted: 1:43 AM, December 9, 2010

One of the five Columbia students busted for alleged drug-dealing in frat houses and dorms not only plans on returning to the Ivy League campus once he makes bail -- he also wants to go to law school.

"Going to Columbia was my dream, and I plan to finish," said Chris Coles, 20, in an interview at the Manhattan House of Detention, a day after the arrests rocked the university.

Coles, an anthropology/political-science major who allegedly sold $5,000 worth of pot to an undercover cop to finance his tuition, said he wants to attend California-Berkeley's exclusive Boalt Hall Law School after graduation.

Hump Day Horror Stories: Don't Go!

I had a good week.  Remember, I'm a hustler.  So I have used my law license to get a broker's license and I have had a couple of listings.  Haven't been able to sell one yet, but I was showing a condo to an older lady and she said something that made me smile.  One of my clients was calling me non-stop (a divorce client and YES they do that) and I had to take the call in front of her.  She said, "Oh, you're a lawyer too?"  "Yep.  I am," says I.  She said, "Oh, Lawyers aren't doing too well anymore.  My niece regrets going, she's earning nearly nothing."  The message is spreading.  It's taking time, but it's happening.

Many people come to BIDER by googling "what happens when I default on student loans."  I know we talk about it in roundabout ways, but i thought I should look for more illustrations of it.  So, I went over to studentloanjustice.org to look for stories about lawyers who are behind on their loans.  Here is a sampling of what happens when you anger Aunt Sallie:

Derek

I finished law school in Pennsylvania in 1998.
I never received a summer internship/clerkship and due to family problems back home I only worked part time in the summers for solo-practitioners.
When I graduated, I moved to California but never got any job offers.
So I moved back to Virginia and "temp'ed" at big lawfirms in D.C.
I got paid $10-15/hr to move boxes and file papers in a suit.
It was mind numbing and had NO potential to grow into a good job.
I had passed the VA bar exam too, but without a summer clerkship, nobody would hire me.
I left to work in the booming Internet field in 2000, but my company was bought by WorldCom which ended up going bankrupt and I was laid off in 2002.
I paid my loans up until that point, but after being harassed while unemployed and having them capitalize my interest every time I took a deferment, I gave up.
I took out $80k in Federal loans and needed an additional $20k in private loans to cover living expenses for the 3 years while in school.
Now my loans are in default, I still don't have a job or a career path.
While I was in major job hunt mode, I was rejected for being too nice, requesting too much salary, and even at Starbucks I was rejected since I came from the Corporate world instead of the restaurant industry!
During all of this, I developed severe clinical depression and contemplated suicide since my life appeared to have all but stopped.
I have started my own business and I am doing OK, but now I am being sued for some of my loans.
I don't have any savings and the only thing I own is a car which might be taken to satisfy part of the judgment for my outstanding loans.
Bankruptcy was meant to give people in dire need a fresh start, and that is exactly what I need.  If nobody will hire me in my profession that I went to school for, and my backup profession didn't pan out, I could use some assistance, not a demand for the FULL amount!
I have no idea what the future holds for me and I feel embarrassed for my family and friends that I am in this situation.  I was just trying to better myself and instead I am FAR worse off than if I had not even gone to college!  A simple life is all I want.  But the ridiculous size of my loan payments compared to my earnings make just eating a struggle.  If it were not for friends and family I would not be here today, but I am tired of being a burden.  And sometimes the only way I can stop thinking I am being a burden is to .....
Thanks US Government and Sallie Mae for turning a creative, intelligent, funny, & athletic human being into a suicidal piece of societal detritus. At least they will have to write off my loans when I am gone.

Meredith

I went to law school specifically to study environmental law so that I might work in the public interest to save our resources for future generations.  I attended Vermont Law School, where I was only able to attend because of the availability of student loans.  When I graduated, my debt was nearly $100,000.  When I first graduated, I took an entry-level position at a small non-profit, and I was immediately forced to consolidate my loans because I could not have afforded the payment otherwise.  When I consolidated, in 1996, interest rates were high, so I became locked in at 8%, which the loan company told me was a good deal, as interest rates could be as high as 12-15% or more if I accepted the "floating" interest rate.  Since I needed some stability and predictability in my monthly loan payment, I locked in at 8%.  Now that interest rates are lower, I've tried everything to find a way to lower the interest rate.  And for ten years, I've been paying a huge student loan payment, and I still have another $60,000 to pay off! 

I've stuck to my guns on doing public interest environmental work, so I have continued working for state government or non-profit organizations, and I currently make less than half of what starting associates make at law firms.  But, as a result, I have no savings, next to nothing in my retirement account, and I've not been able to purchase a home.  With the real estate market spiraling out of control, my chances of being able to afford a home now are next to nil.  I am absolutely outraged that this country allows people who simply want to better themselves, and in some cases, help to better the world, and instead of helping these people to make a contribution, we are penalized and financially crippled for a lifetime.  It is absolutely criminal in my mind.  What can I do to help bring this issue to light?  I just saw your editorial in the Baltimore Sun, and I was so relieved to FINALLY see that there is an organized movement on this issue.  -Meredith Lathbury, Vermont Law School, Class of 1996, non-profit environmental attorney.

Richard

I was admitted to one of the top 14 law schools in the country. And while I did well there I was forced to take out $150,000 in student loans. I know that is a lot of money but I figured this is prestigious, I can get a job making six figures. 2 years after graduation I was still unemployed (I had above average grades but I for some reason no one wanted to hire me). While collection notices came in I just ignored them, figuring the government would have some program for those of us who couldn't afford these extortionate rates. I filed for bankruptcy (which got rid of my 50,000 of credit card debt) which did nothing to stop the loan officers from the DoE. As it stands now I owe 412,329.57 (they expect monthly payments of nearly 4,000) and I am still unable to find a job. I am screwed, I think I will probably kill myself.

Frank

I graduated from law school in December of 97. I have paid on my student loans off and on over the past 9+ years and have paid back an estimated $75,000 on a loan that when I graduated was a little of $100,000. When I last checked the pay off amount it was over $135,000 and that's with paying $75,000 + over the past 9 years. I owe more on it now than when I took them out !! One of my loans is in default, they claim I owe them $23,000+ (which somehow jumped from $17,000 in a span of about 30 days) My two other lenders are close to defaulting and I am unsure if I should just let them default. I mean whats the point of paying on these things if you own more on them after 10 years then when you started. Who cares if I owe this money after I die of old age. I am self employed and all of my clients either pay in cash or write a check so the chances of them getting money from a garnishment is low. If after several years of not paying these blood suckers anything wont they eventually roll over and offer you some type of settlement ? I spoke to a friend from law school about 2 years ago and he had defaulted on his loans and he claims they offered him a buy out settlement. He did not own a house at the time, had no real bank account, or car or anything of any real value, he was self employed and worked out of his Dad's office which was in his Dad's name. Is this tactic workable ? Simply give them nothing for several years if needed and wait till they know they are not going to be able to collect then ask for a settlement amount ?

I don't advocate suicide, but interesting that dying
is the only way to relieve you of student loan debt.
Don't you think?

Is this Article about North or South Korea? Either Way, I'd Rather be There than Here.

Joking of course.  I'm not going anywhere, but I definitely have respect and admiration for whichever Korea after reading this....
Quotas--for attorneys?   Obviously, the Korean Government has been reading BIDER and they see the writing on the wall [The Wall Reads: "Unemployed and Homeless Attorneys Coming Soon!"].  The Korean Government, unlike the ABA, wants to control the lawyer population--much like New Jersey controls the black bear population.  Failure to do so, will result in many ruined lives.  The Korea law students are on crack and possibly opium--wanting limitless access to law licenses.  They are clearly short-sighted.  I actually have more than a few readers from Korea and I advise you to spread my warnings far and wide.  You will be us in thirty years.  Read below and weep for our comrades:

About 3,000 law school students have signed written pledges to quit their schools in a collective protest against the government’s move to limit the number of lawyer licenses to be issued to graduates.

They staged a large-scale rally against the move in front of the Ministry of Justice in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province, Monday, a day ahead of the government’s deliberation to decide on the exact quota for successful test takers in the 2012 bar exam.

They represent more than 80 percent of a total of 3,827 students registered at 25 law schools nationwide. 

Korea is basically heaven for lawyers:

The dispute began after it was reported that the ministry was considering capping the ratio of successful bar exam takers at around 50 percent of all graduates. Under the government policy to limit the number of new lawyers, only around 1,200 graduates will be given licenses each year. The government and the association of lawyers believe the market is already saturated here and the number of new lawyers should be checked. 

You don't have to look too far to see the results of doubling and tripling your lawyer population.  Nevada?  New York?  L.A.?

Many lawyers [are] concern[ed] that adding more than 2,000 will lead to a “collapse” of the whole industry. 

“Many junior lawyers have struggled to land a job since the government increased the number of successful bar exam takers to 1,000. The situation will get worse if the number of new lawyers is not restricted,” said lawyer Lee Jung-hwan at a recent conference. 

He also expressed concerns about the entry of unqualified lawyers into the market. “The government should put priority on how to maintain quality services,” Lee said.

That Lee dude is right on the money.  100% of our law student population has no idea how to practice law after graduation...but somehow the ABA is not concerned.

Perhaps, we should do away with the ABA and give the responsibility of governing our profession to the entity that picks us up when we can't find jobs after graduation--the government.  After all, they provide out of work attorneys with unemployment benefits and food stamps.  The government also causes the problem by funding our educations.  Maybe they are best situated to stop the problem by limiting the number of lawyers who may practice the law--going in the front end or out the rear end of the this monster that they have created.

That's how to get their attention.

Tom Cooley LS: 4 Campuses Too Many

This video is a joke.  Thank you, Tipster!  Only one alumna.... only one.  And bunches of students talking about how ready they feel.  Gag!

Discounted Tuition at UNH School of Law... Hardly News.

Believe it or not, University of New Hampshire School of law is discounting tuition for in-state residents.  A whopping $4,000 off every year if you're in-state and an additional $4,000 if you're enrolled at University of New Hampshire undergrad.  That's $8,000.00!
Of course, that begs the question.  How much is tuition at UNH School of Law?  $39,000.00 a year.  That means, if you graduate from this school with $93,000 of debt for tuition alone.  That's no bargain.  UNH School of Law will be affiliated with Franklin Pierce in the fall and its number 9 in Intellectual Property.  However, it's still not worth it.  This would be real news if they cut tuition in half.  Nice PR game.  Try again.