Loudmouthed politicians from both parties build entire careers on tough criminal laws and strict sentencing policies — all supposedly to show lawbreakers a thing or two about “personal responsibility.”

But responsibility is a one-way street in the world of Missouri state government.
Big talk about zero tolerance in law enforcement has been accompanied by mismanagement of public resources. Consider the profound neglect of the state’s public defender system, which has been starved to a point of scandal.

Unconscionably large case loads have been dumped on small, low-paid staffs with few experienced lawyers. Defendants routinely wait a year, sometimes two, before coming to trial.

But that’s old news, with little prospect of change anytime soon. In times of tight state budgets, there’s not much sympathy for people in jail or prison — or the lawyers paid to defend them. (Take a look at the graphic above from the Columbia Missourian; it dates from 2005.)
But allowing the public defender system to crumble results in a colossal waste of taxpayer money. Even people who could not care less about the constitutional rights of the accused should be upset about that.

Simply put, state lawmakers have created a system that costs $30 million dollars a year, more or less, and is doomed — indeed, designed — to fail despite daily heroics by deeply committed defense lawyers.

The irresponsibility doesn’t end there. Current efforts of “reform” will make the system even less effective and will weaken the courts.

The public defender system is so short of funds that a new administrative rule soon will require that clients be put on a waiting list. Defendants, entitled by law to a lawyer, instead will be entitled to get on a waiting list for a lawyer. So they sit in jail, day after day, costing taxpayers money.

Lawyers managing the system hardly can be faulted for this. The status quo simply cannot be sustained on the system’s existing budget. The state effectively has pushed public defenders to take on more work than can be handled effectively — or professionally.

As one lawyer put it: “It’s not constitutional. It’s not legal. It’s not ethical. And it’s not justice.”

But the new rule is not reform, either. It simply would create more work for an overburdened court system. Judges and court administrators would have to pick up where the public defenders leave off.

That brings us to the Legislature’s latest “reform” effort: Senate Bill 767, passed by the Senate last week and pending in the House. It would codify into law the rule creating waiting lists. It also would strip judges of power to appoint public defenders to represent criminal defendants seeking what’s called “post-conviction relief.”
Those are cases in which the defendant has pleaded guilty or been convicted by a judge or jury and exhausted his or her appeals. But he wants a new trial, maybe claiming his lawyer didn’t do a good job or that new evidence has emerged.

Senate Bill 767 would prevent judges from appointing public defenders to such cases.
The Constitution doesn’t require that lawyers be appointed to prisoners seeking post-conviction relief. What’s more, experience shows that a good number of these petitions have no merit. So wouldn’t this be a sensible place to give public defenders a break from already impossible case loads?

Not really. Prisoners still will seek post-conviction relief, with or without lawyers. Courts still will have to hear those petitions. Some prisoners who have a legitimate beef will see their cases fall between the cracks. The courts will have to cope, powerless to order counsel into the case.

Senate Bill 767 is no solution. It is a last-ditch effort to save the over-burdened public defender system from collapse by pushing its problems onto the overburdened court system. Justice should be swift and certain. In Missouri, it’s neither.