to comment on his own hapless existence.nGeorge Bush, give the devil his due,nunderstands some of this, and the Presidentnhas for years pretended to an interestnin country music, going so far as tonattend last year’s CMA ceremony. Realnpeople with votes—as opposed to drugnaddicts, boat people, and worldwide victimsnof discrimination—real people likencountry music and take it far more seriouslynthan they do politicians. If BillnClinton and the wife who only undernpressure agreed to be called Mrs. Clintonndon’t understand that, then they andntheir party are doomed to sit out anothernfour years whining about the State ofnthe Union Address of a Yalie who hasnlearned how to wear flannel shirts, dropnthe g’s off his participles, and feign annaffection for Merie and Randy and Jones.nThey know it’s as phony as a speech bynPeggy Noonan, but you can’t help beingnflattered when the President of the worldnpretends to be an American.n—Thomas FlemingnVICE-PRESIDENT QUAYLE’Snspeech last year regarding the overabundancenof lawyers in America seemsnto have had little effect on the 84 studentsnin my first-year Civil Procedurenclass. The Vice-President’s speech hasnaffected only some members of the barnwho are looking to protect their interests.nThis lack of response to the Vice-President’snspeech is unfortunate because hendelivered the right message; he just chosenthe wrong audience.nThe Vice-President correctly notednthat the American legal system is repletenwith problems. Certainly, most reasonablenpeople, which includes even anhealthy number of lawyers, agree with thenVice-President’s call for a system thatnmakes the loser pay the winner’s costs innmany cases. So too, many of those samenpersons would agree that the number ofnlawsuits filed in America hurt our country’sncompetitiveness. However, neithernof these problems, nor a vast number ofnothers hindering our legal system, arosenbecause of too many lawyers. Supply didnnot create demand.nInstead, the free market system hasnconvinced more and more, and better andnbetter (so my admissions director tellsnme) students to matriculate at my lawnschool and at others across the country.nThe free market, with a hand from L.A.nLaw, has convinced these students thatnbecoming a lawyer will benefit themnenough to forego three years of salary atnsome other endeavor and to spend atnleast fifteen thousand dollars to come tonthe law school where I teach. Many of myncurrent students have left jobs to comento law school because they think this willnlead to better and more frequent promotionsnin their line of work. Employers,nin other words, have provided an incentivenfor attending law school. They havendone so for several reasons.nForty or fifty years ago employers consideredna bachelor’s degree a mark ofndistinction; an employee who was a collegengraduate was, in fact, considered annexceptional thinker. Very few of us holdnsuch ideas today. As the number of collegesnand college graduates proliferated,nit grew harder to distinguish what thendegree actually meant, and whether itnmeant anything other than four years ofnspent time. Many college graduates cannotnanalyze difficult problems, and somenof them are barely literate. I know, I teachnsome of the best of these graduates everynyear. In short, a college diploma nownhas little meaning, and like all paper currencynit is subject to devaluation. Consequently,nthe law degree has replaced thenB.A. as good coin.nLaw professors at most law schoolsntoday, Yale being an exception, teachnfrom casebooks and the legal codes.nInstruction from either one demandsnthat the students leam how to read a textnand how to distinguish right from wrong,nsuccess from failure, and winners fromnlosers. The law student learns how to analyzenand to find a principle and apply itnto varied situations, and how to see annissue from multiple perspectives. Virtuallynnone of these skills are taught,ncultivated, or rigorously tested in most ofnour undergraduate institutions.nSeveral aspects of the current businessnclimate further encourage the hiring andnpromoting of lawyers. This country isnoverrun with laws of all types, many ofnthem as difficult to understand asnRICO. Every business must obey volumesnof tax, environmental, and regulatorynlaws issued by federal, state, county,nand city govemment. Few companiesnand corporations can even conduct businessnwithout technically breaching atnleast some laws. As a consequence, manynbusinesses find it beneficial to have anlawyer on staff to recognize and forestallnany legal difficulties. This is critical inntoday’s regulated business world whenneven a lawsuit or a technical breach of anlaw may bankrupt a company. Manynnnemployers have concluded that not havingna lawyer may be more expensive thannhaving one.nThese varied reasons give credencento the argument that, although the Vice-nPresident was correct when he said thencountry had too many lawyers, he spokento the wrong audience. If the Vice-Presidentnwanted to decrease the number ofnlawyers he should have addressed thenthree sources that created the demand.nFirst, he should have addressed the country’snuniversities, where true learning isnat a low ebb. Second, he should havenspoken to the legislators in this countrynwho continue to write laws that have fewnbenefits other than ensuring full employmentnfor lawyers. This should have beennfollowed by the President’s stated commitmentnnot to sign any legislation thatndoes not carry with it a clear analysis ofnthe legal costs of compliance with the legislationnand the likelihood of extensivenlitigation arising from the law. Third, henshould have encouraged the President tonappoint judges who believe the lawnshould be interpreted and not written andnrewritten by the courts.nFortunately, we live in a country wherendemand gives rise to supply. Unfortunately,ndemand for lawyers is highnbecause colleges are failing at their essentialntask, because legislators write volumesnof opaque laws, and because judges continuento rewrite laws to fit their particularnconcept of justice. Mr. Vice-President,ncut demand.n—Stephen ]. SafraneknFor Immediate ServicenCHRONICLESnNEW SUBSCRIBERSnTOLL FREE NUMBERn1-800-877-5459nMAY 1992/7n