Hey, there! Log in / Register
Judiciary v. Patrick
By adamg on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 1:09pm
On Red Mass. Group, David Whelan wonders why state judges only launched their protest against cuts in their budget the day after the governor signed the budget:
The problem isn't so much that the courts will close, but I find it disturbing (and confusing) that the "state's top judges" and the Patrick administration are having this discussion a day after the budget was signed.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Something else that's laughable?
The fact that public defenders and the trial court squeal as loudly as they do about the fact that they can't administer quality justice when their budgets aren't everything the hope, and yet the district attorneys in this fine Commonwealth have had to give back money in previous years and are more overworked than either of these arms of justice, and have uttered nary a peep.
You think that ADAs handling double and triple caseloads without being compensated correctly makes a difference in the public safety arena?
Imagine if the DAs said "we have to shut down operations a day a week in order to be responsible to our people"? It wouldn't happen.
I'm not saying that the judiciary's gripes aren't legit. I'm saying that, while you're at it, pay your prosecutors correctly.
You do know that the courts
You do know that the courts don't pay the prosecutors, right? Talk to the legislature on that one (I guarantee you the Mass DA's Association does...)
As for the courts' ability to function with the current budget, this is a disaster for anyone who values speedy and accessible justice. The courts have been cut way out of proportion to other parts of the budget - treated as if they were some unimportant executive branch agency rather than the third branch of government. (but note that funding for the Office of the Commissioner of Probation and the Office of the Community Corrections has barely been touched - why would that be, do you think?) There has been a hard hiring freeze in effect for almost four years, resulting in the loss of over 1100 of about 6500 employees. The executive branch has continued to hire throughout... While there was some fat to start with - or, more accurately, an uneven distribution of resources within the courts, mostly because of legislative micromanaging - there wasn't that much. Some courts have less than 50% of the staff they need to function effectively.
I'm so disappointed in Deval Patrick, who I supported enthusiastically and worked for. I wish he were running again just so I could decline to support him again.
Anyway, I hope none of you ever find yourselves in a position to need help from the courts - a 209A for a family member? being a crime victim? getting ripped off by a landlord or a contractor - because we're headed right back to the time when it could take years to get the simplest things taken care of, just because although there are plenty of judges, there isn't enough staff to support them.