Court fees veto worth reconsidering
The Blogland is no friend of a lot of those who talk about the "pain" governmental agencies are enduring in this recession. Had several years of surplus revenue been better managed, then maybe the current situation wouldn't be so bad.
It seems that those who cry the loudest are the ones who've been hurt the least, while agencies whose functions are often vitally important, such as public safety, endure patiently and quietly. In our dealing with the state's judiciary, we've found the judges we've dealt with to be frugal and responsible. They work far beyond the usual 9-to-5 and deserve to be cut a little slack with this vote.
House Bill 3161, sponsored by House Judiciary Chair Jim Harrison, is aimed at trying to protect one of the state's most important functions: keeping the courts open. The Blogland calls upon legislators to support the override of the Governor's veto of these fee increases.
It seems that those who cry the loudest are the ones who've been hurt the least, while agencies whose functions are often vitally important, such as public safety, endure patiently and quietly. In our dealing with the state's judiciary, we've found the judges we've dealt with to be frugal and responsible. They work far beyond the usual 9-to-5 and deserve to be cut a little slack with this vote.
House Bill 3161, sponsored by House Judiciary Chair Jim Harrison, is aimed at trying to protect one of the state's most important functions: keeping the courts open. The Blogland calls upon legislators to support the override of the Governor's veto of these fee increases.
As to the issue of denial of justice due to higher court costs, it has been a long-standing practice of judges to waive court fees for indigent filers, mostly inmates like Susan Smith. We've talked with more than one judge who has indicated that they'll continue to waive filing fees for indigent filers when appropriate.
We do question the claims that these fee increases would help curtail frivilous lawsuits. Given the relatively small amounts asked for in this increase, we doubt it. Anyone who wants to reduce the workload and costs being created by frivilous lawsuits should sign on to meaningful tort reform efforts, which the Blogland has also supported.
It would also be fair to allow greater scrutiny of how the state's judiciary spends the tax dollars which have been provided for operations. In return for legislators voting to allow these fee increases, we hope the court system will agree to allow that scrutiny. If not, then continued accomodations by legislators should be off the table.
Overall, the state's courts are vital to this state, and by overriding the Governor's veto, they can enact a stop-gap measure that can keep the courts open and functioning effectively for the people and businesses of the state.
Sanford might be right in that the General Fund should pay for essential services such as access to the courts, but we live in reality.
The General Assembly does not give a damn about the family court matter, the criminal court matter or the civil court matter that the average citizen has to deal with. There are no lobbyists paying for their drinks and eats. Abused children in family court come to mind. They offer no campaign contributions or receptions. The victim of domestic violence hosts no reception for the General Assembly.
Thus, the General Assembly does not give a shit. They are too worried about their trial lawyer friends having to pay higher filing fees on some car wreck case. Let's be frank, if you don't give money, most of them won't even return your call. Why should you be shocked that they would let the people's access to justice die?
It is all bought and paid for, Mr. Capps. To Hell with 'em all.
Perhaps we should implement self-pay for all branches of government. We could charge members of the General Assemply fees to propose bills and hold committee hearings? How about a fee on any statewide office holder who wants to hold a press conference?