The funny thing about this blog and my writing is that the folks on the right dislike me and accuse me of being a closet Democrat (I am not kidding) and pretty routinely call me a RINO. The folks on the left have called me a "far rightie," just this week. It is clear that I am as far under the skin of a lot of folks at both party extremes as it is possible to get.
Some on both sides would doubtless like to see me leave the scene, and, as it turns out, that could probably be arranged. Got $2.5 million?
No, I don't take bribes, and if I did, $2.5 million wouldn't be enough. Everyone has a price. I'm not sure what mine would be, but I know it is a lot higher than $2.5 million.
I came on the scene because I want to see real legal ethics reform that protects the public. As long as the lawyers have a stranglehold on the rule making and enforcement process, which they do through the Supreme Court, the public can never expect adequate protection.
For example, we have a new set of rules changes, already approved by the Supreme Court, that appear to be designed to weaken lawyer ethics while making the unwary believe that they are making them stronger. The folks writing this kind of stuff didn't go to law school just to pass the time of day. They went so that they could make their fortune through fraud, deception, and deceit, so that they could take their neighbor's pittance and make him feel good about it.
As my lawsuit wound its way the court system and I faced an attorney who has been described by his successor attorney as perpetrating one of the worst examples of attorney misconduct imaginable..." I have had years to think about how this system could be fixed. No one can claim with a straight face that the current system works or has any mechanism to stop ongoing attorney misconduct.
I'd like the fix to be non-partisan, which is almost impossible. If it can't be non-partisan, then the next best thing is to create a partisan balance of terror in the system, where if one side takes a partisan action, both sides suffer.
My fix would tighten the system to the degree that lawyers who practice predatory law would be without a law license so fast it would make their head swim. Prosecutors who couldn't find the time and money to prosecute perjury wouldn't have a license. The same goes for prosecutors who turn a blind eye toward obstruction of justice by officers of the court.
Judges and Justices who couldn't render a decision within the 90 day time line set by state law or who couldn't obey their own ethics code would find themselves out of a job, without a license, and stripped of immunity so that the damaged litigants could be made whole.
Lawyer-legislators who try to throw issues into the courts instead of compromising would find themselves just plain legislators. Judges who let legislators throw legislative business into the courts without immediately throwing it back would find themselves digging ditches.
The Colorado Bar Association might suddenly find itself operating as a mutual insurance company with a lot of old claims. Judicial performance commission members who concealed misconduct from the public might find themselves facing lawsuits from folks damaged by future similar misconduct. It would be a different world, and a more just world.
I think it would probably take about $2.5 million to sell such a system to the public as an initiative. That is about double what the CBA spent to beat Amendment 40.
If I had control of $2.5 million for this purpose, I probably wouldn't have much time to blog. The left wingers could go about electing Mark Udall without my kibitzing, and the folks on the far right could primary, blog, boycott, purge, and infight the Republican party into the stone age if they so choose.
I'm not above taking $2.5 million from both sides. Anyone want to call Tim Gill?
I can't be bribed, but I can be bought. Think about it, but don't think too long.
In all seriousness, this is the election cycle to try to fix a legal ethics system that desperately needs to be fixed, and if someone really did come up with the money, that is where my attention would be.