I received an email from the Iowa State Bar Association yesterday. The letter pertained to the planned next round of layoffs by the Iowa Judicial Branch.
http://www.iowacourts.gov/news_service/news_releases/NewsItem399/index.asp
Judicial Branch Announces Further Budget Cuts
Des Moines, November 12, 2009— Today, the Iowa Judicial Branch initiated further steps to reduce its operating expenses for the current fiscal year to help address the state's severe financial problems. (See Supervisory Order) The judicial branch will lay off 105 employees, will cut 100 vacant staff positions, and will reduce the hours of 58 employees. All told, these cuts equate to a 9.3% reduction in workforce (See charts). Today's actions are in addition to the ten days of court closures and unpaid leave for all judges, magistrates, and court employees announced earlier this week.
These and other cost-cutting measures will reduce the judicial branch FY 10 operating budget by $11.4 million, or 7.1%. The 7.1% cut corresponds with the state's revenue shortfall as estimated by the State Revenue Estimating Conference last month. Legislative leaders have indicated to court officials that the legislature expects the judicial branch to make substantial cuts in response to this estimate. [Emphasis mine]
And the ISBA is trying to play this off as some sort of moral victory – i.e. “Well, the governor ordered a ten percent budget cut to the executive branch. We valiant attorneys were able to get by with only a 7.1 percent budget cut.” Yeah, congratulations - your mothers must be very proud of you.
The press release concludes with:
The Iowa Judicial Branch endured two previous rounds of budget cuts in 2009. In March, the legislature cut the appropriation to the judicial branch FY 09 budget by $3.8 million, resulting in five court closure days, reductions in travel and other cuts. In June, the supreme court approved an FY 10 budget that reduced operating expenses by $5.4 million. This reduction resulted in the elimination of 34 staff positions along with other cost-cutting measures. With today's staff reduction, there are 15% fewer judicial branch employees in FY 10 than there were ten years ago. (See Budget FAQ) [Emphasis mine]
Wow, another round of layoffs. This is the third round of budget cuts within the same year. There is still a month and a half left in the year - maybe they can sneak in another budget cut.
Some questions:
Now, aren’t you happy that you chose to enter such a secure, well-paid, and honorable "profession"? Aren’t you thrilled with your decision? Aren’t you glad that you took out tens of thousands more in student loans for the privilege of being an attorney-at-law?
You may say, “Well, they are cutting back on judicial staff. That does not apply to lawyers.” Do you think that a smaller judiciary will not affect attorneys?! Sure, it’s no big deal. That’s why ISBA president Jane Lorentzen sent out an email to all members - even student members - of the state bar with regard to this matter.
Judges will be upset with having less staff, court reporters, and court clerks. “But judges are above that,” you say? Please, I have seen judges dress down attorneys in open court for not wearing a tie. Do you honestly think judges will be able to spend the same amount of time or resources - which wasn't much to begin with - on a given case with less money to operate?
If you are a plaintiff’s attorney, it will take longer for your clients to get redress. If you a criminal defense lawyer, judges will be less apt to waste time on hearing or even considering motions; they will also be more prone to quickly move their docket along. When I was in the criminal defense clinic, I represented people who were piss-poor. Every single time any of us in the clinic moved to get drug or alcohol screening fees paid by the state, it got shot down immediately by the judge.
News flash: not everyone had the $60-$100 fee laying around to pay for the evaluation. I represented one woman who had come to our initial interview (and all subsequent court appearances) in a pair of shoes that had several holes in them. She wore plastic bags over her socks to prevent snow and water from getting inside her shoes. Her sweatshirt had holes in it. This lady did not have two nickels to rub together! When I filed a Motion for Substance Abuse Evaluation at State Expense, pursuant to Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.11, it was shot down the same day! This happened with every single person I (and as far as I am aware, that the defense clinic) represented that semester. And yes, the motion itself was correct and flawless – this is a pretty simple document to draw up.
Even with the cutbacks in staff, judges and prosecutors still need to clear their precious dockets. I saw the effects of the furloughs. Many people would come to court on Friday, and see empty lots and locked doors. I remember the looks and reactions I got from prosecutors whenever I dared to file a Motion to Produce for police tapes of the stop. You would have thought I had asked them if I could sleep with their wives.
So, again I ask you: Aren’t you just thrilled that you decided to enter such a secure, noble “profession”? Welcome to reality, Drake and Iowa law students. It's much different from the bill of goods sold to you by the law schools, isn't it?
The Iowa Judicial Branch endured two previous rounds of budget cuts in 2009. In March, the legislature cut the appropriation to the judicial branch FY 09 budget by $3.8 million, resulting in five court closure days, reductions in travel and other cuts. In June, the supreme court approved an FY 10 budget that reduced operating expenses by $5.4 million. This reduction resulted in the elimination of 34 staff positions along with other cost-cutting measures. With today's staff reduction, there are 15% fewer judicial branch employees in FY 10 than there were ten years ago. (See Budget FAQ) [Emphasis mine]
Wow, another round of layoffs. This is the third round of budget cuts within the same year. There is still a month and a half left in the year - maybe they can sneak in another budget cut.
Some questions:
Now, aren’t you happy that you chose to enter such a secure, well-paid, and honorable "profession"? Aren’t you thrilled with your decision? Aren’t you glad that you took out tens of thousands more in student loans for the privilege of being an attorney-at-law?
You may say, “Well, they are cutting back on judicial staff. That does not apply to lawyers.” Do you think that a smaller judiciary will not affect attorneys?! Sure, it’s no big deal. That’s why ISBA president Jane Lorentzen sent out an email to all members - even student members - of the state bar with regard to this matter.
Judges will be upset with having less staff, court reporters, and court clerks. “But judges are above that,” you say? Please, I have seen judges dress down attorneys in open court for not wearing a tie. Do you honestly think judges will be able to spend the same amount of time or resources - which wasn't much to begin with - on a given case with less money to operate?
If you are a plaintiff’s attorney, it will take longer for your clients to get redress. If you a criminal defense lawyer, judges will be less apt to waste time on hearing or even considering motions; they will also be more prone to quickly move their docket along. When I was in the criminal defense clinic, I represented people who were piss-poor. Every single time any of us in the clinic moved to get drug or alcohol screening fees paid by the state, it got shot down immediately by the judge.
News flash: not everyone had the $60-$100 fee laying around to pay for the evaluation. I represented one woman who had come to our initial interview (and all subsequent court appearances) in a pair of shoes that had several holes in them. She wore plastic bags over her socks to prevent snow and water from getting inside her shoes. Her sweatshirt had holes in it. This lady did not have two nickels to rub together! When I filed a Motion for Substance Abuse Evaluation at State Expense, pursuant to Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.11, it was shot down the same day! This happened with every single person I (and as far as I am aware, that the defense clinic) represented that semester. And yes, the motion itself was correct and flawless – this is a pretty simple document to draw up.
Even with the cutbacks in staff, judges and prosecutors still need to clear their precious dockets. I saw the effects of the furloughs. Many people would come to court on Friday, and see empty lots and locked doors. I remember the looks and reactions I got from prosecutors whenever I dared to file a Motion to Produce for police tapes of the stop. You would have thought I had asked them if I could sleep with their wives.
So, again I ask you: Aren’t you just thrilled that you decided to enter such a secure, noble “profession”? Welcome to reality, Drake and Iowa law students. It's much different from the bill of goods sold to you by the law schools, isn't it?
Why do you get so bent out of shape over these things? Did Drake or Iowa cause the economic crisis?
ReplyDeleteDrake and Iowa are just symptoms of the larger problem.
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting on my blog. I appreciate your efforts in exposing the law school racket. Also thanks for the offer to help me out - I may take you up on that at some point.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that the outside media is giving you a chance to let others know about how bad things are for many graduates. The more we can get out the word, the more people may be spared from this path.
Informing others, especially prospective law students, has been my goal from day one. If I can save others from this terrible "career" choice, then all of this will have been worth it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, it is nice to have one more ally around. The industry simply needs to be exposed, or else countless more young people will be financially duped by it.
proud ttt grad is still in law school.. I'm positive of it.
ReplyDelete