The Rhode Island Bar Association is asking the state Supreme Court to require lawyers to channel interest money from trust accounts into a program to provide legal services to the Rhode Island’s poor.

“There’s a dire need to increase funding for legal services,” said John A. Tarantino, president of the Rhode Island Bar Foundation, the association’s charitable arm. “Legal services for the poor don’t go down in bad times. They go up in bad times.”

Attorneys have been able to “opt out” of the program since it was created by the state Supreme Court in 1985. About 35 percent of the state’s roughly 3,600 eligible lawyers — those in private practice — now choose not to participate.

The program relies on often pennies of interest accrued from accounts held a day or two for clients, such as for real estate closings. That interest is funneled to the foundation, which distributes grants to organizations dedicated to providing legal services to disadvantaged Rhode Islanders, promoting knowledge of the law, or improving the administration of justice and delivery of legal services.

“It’s not like the clients are giving up money,” Tarantino said.

The association and the foundation petitioned the state Supreme Court to make the change in September. In addition, they are asking the court to require lawyers to keep the trust accounts with banks that offer the same interest rate for those accounts as others.

Currently, Rhode Island banks offer lower interest payments for the trust accounts, Tarantino said.

“What’s happening here is the poor in Rhode Island are bearing the brunt of Rhode Island banks not paying the same interest rates,” Tarantino said.

But the proposal has its critics.

Lawyer John D. Lynch Sr. argued at a Supreme Court hearing on Thursday that it was unfair to use clients’ money. “Let us do it with our own money,” Lynch said.

Lynch is among the lawyers who opted out in the past. “Nobody’s against charity … [The] thing that bothers me is we’re being ordered.”

Lawyer Paul Fontaine also objected, saying he didn’t support “the charities” that received grants and questioning the program’s transparency. “There’s no accountability.”

Justice Maureen McKenna Goldberg, too, expressed caution. “I don’t want to overly burden attorneys,” she said.

Tarantino defended the program, saying the grant recipients were listed in the foundation’s annual report. The foundation has also asked the state’s congressional delegation to ensure the trust accounts would be federally insured fully, he said.

The foundation has awarded more than $12 million in grants since the program began. This year’s recipients of $1.6 million in grants included Rhode Island Legal Services; the International Institute of Rhode Island, which provides free immigration legal services to foreign-born residents; the Rhode Island Bar Association Legal Information and Referral Services for the Elderly, and the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

If the contribution is made mandatory, Rhode Island will join 38 other states, including Connecticut and Massachusetts, in requiring all eligible lawyers to participate. Those states have seen their programs double and triple in strength, Tarantino said.

The foundation has seen the program shrink in past months as real estate transactions have plummeted with the downturn in the economy, Tarantino said.

Without the proposed change, the program could be depleted altogether within 2½ years in the current climate, he said.

There is no timetable for the Supreme Court to make its decision, according to court spokesman Craig N. Berke.

kmulvane@projo.com