Sic Semper Tyrannis

I previously posted this bit on the Show-Me Institute’s blog, Show-Me Daily.

——————————————————-

As I am writing this post on Thursday afternoon, I am not yet officially licensed to practice law in the state of Missouri. Tomorrow, when many of you will be reading this post, I will officially be licensed to practice law in this state. In order to convince the powers that be to give me their blessing to use my lawyering skills, in February I had to take and pass an arduous and mostly useless ritual called a bar exam. The test is insanely difficult, in no small part because it requires each examinee to demonstrate memorization of a range of legal concepts that they will likely never use in their practice. For example, even though my expertise is in constitutional litigation, I had to be prepared to answer — from memory — detailed questions related to wills and estates, family law, secured transactions, and commercial paper.

As with most people who have passed a bar exam, now that a couple of months have passed, I probably couldn’t tell you much at all about those subjects without first doing some research about the question asked — which is, in fact, what attorneys tend to do in the real world! In short, my ability to earn a living in the profession for which I am trained depended on my developing a (short-lived) command of information that would be thoroughly useless to me after the exam.

All of that is to say that the idea of licensing attorneys is little more than a convoluted way of restricting the services available to consumers and bolstering the rates we are allowed to charge clients, all under the guise of “protecting the public.” Well, that’s just silly and patronizing. People recognize the difference between gourmet restaurants and street hot dog vendors, and they can also recognize the difference between a white-shoe law firm whose attorneys graduated from Ivy League schools and a small-time local lawyer who went to night school so he could learn just enough to hang out his own shingle.

I’ll happily admit that there are some bad attorneys out there already, and that there would likely be more if you didn’t have to get permission from the state in order to practice. But academic credentials and a license from the state is no guarantee of quality, just as many fine, smart lawyers might have trouble passing the bar exam. In fact, the people most likely to hire a lawyer with questionable credentials are those who otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford legal representation at all. So the issue really boils down to why the state should be in a position to tell citizens that they are not permitted to choose who could best fulfill their need for legal representation.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch carried a story today that touches on this question. Attorneys from Missouri’s Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel are trying to strip Mark Belz — an attorney with a distinguished 30-year career — of his law license because several years ago he used $175,000 of his clients’ funds for his own purposes. This is serious business, as attorneys are ethically bound never to breach their clients’ trust in this way, and those who do are almost always disbarred. But several facts make Mr. Belz’s case unique.

First off, he recognized that what he had done was wrong without being caught. He confessed, apologized, and made restitution for the funds used. Second, at the time of his wrongdoing he was suffering from bipolar disorder — an illness for which he is now being treated — and his psychiatrist has testified that he is unlikely ever to repeat such behavior. Finally, and most importantly, his clients forgave him and continued to use Mr. Belz as their attorney. To the best of my knowledge, no one is interested in pressing criminal charges.

No one, not even Mr. Belz, is contending that he is without fault. But the market provides a ready solution for situations like this, without depriving someone of their right to earn a livelihood. When any service provider, regardless of their profession, breaches the trust of a client or customer, word gets around. Potential clients or customers can discover these sorts of transgressions by exercising a little bit of diligence on their own part. Armed with such information, it should be up to the consumer rather than the government to decide whether they value the provider’s services enough to risk similar experiences.

Removing the state’s authority to exclude people from the legal profession is a market solution that would address a number of issues. Aspiring attorneys could apprentice under practicing attorneys, and thereby would not have to waste thousands of dollars and years of their lives in law schools whose courses are heavy on theory, but do little to teach students how to be lawyers. This would lower the costs of entry to the profession, relieving young attorneys of the pressure to charge high rates in order to pay off student debt. The larger pool of service providers would also result in lower-cost legal service, meaning that more people would be able to afford representation. And, most importantly, it would move us that much closer to being a society in which ordinary people are free to seek their own happiness and prosperity without first obtaining the government’s permission.

Today I had a conversation with Marcia, my office’s administrative assistant, about the initiative petition seeking to allow Missouri’s voters to amend the state constitution to forbid the government to grant any sort of preferences based on race. The amendment is sponsored by Ward Connerly, a Californian who has been campaigning to end race-based affirmative action programs nationwide. Marcia (who is black and who, I believe, trusts that I am sincerely interested in helping the black community) asked me to explain why any fair-minded person would be in favor of such an amendment. Her questions and comments as we spoke reinforced to me how ineffective (or, possibly, disinterested?) the freedom movement has been in understanding and responding to the concerns of minorities regarding efforts to end race-based affirmative action. I decided to write this post as a way of answering Marcia’s question, and so that those who currently favor race-based affirmative action will understand how a fair-minded person could come to a conclusion different from their own.

I think readers of this post need to know that I used to be a pretty solid liberal. I grew up in the South, amidst constant reminders of slavery, the Jim Crow era, the Civil Rights movement, and its aftermath. I have seen and continue to see that racism persists in our society, to the detriment of many individuals who would otherwise have more opportunity than is currently afforded them. Ever since I left high school, one of my strongest interests in law and politics has been to play some small role in improving the chances for minorities to overcome the legacy of poverty and the racism that still exists in our nation to realize the traditional American Dream.

With that as my background, it should be no surprise that I supported affirmative action. Initially, it was because I found persuasive Lyndon Johnson’s explanation that “[y]ou do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say ‘You are free to compete with all the others,’ and still just believe that you have been completely fair.” With racism still a significant factor in American society, how could anyone not support programs that would do something to help out those against whom the deck seems perpetually stacked?

In time, my perspective on the issue has changed. Not because I think that racism has ceased to be a factor in contemporary America, but because I realized that–by and large–race-based affirmative action programs create solutions that are every bit as unfair as the circumstances that motivated their adoption. For every minority student who sees their dream realized only because an affirmative action policy dictated that they should be admitted (and I am explicitly excluding those minority applicants whose achievements alone would have secured their admission), another student’s dream is shattered for no reason other than the color of their skin or the ethnicity of their parents. I became persuaded that we were misguidedly attempting to perpetrate a second wrong in order to make a situation “right.” After all, nothing guaranteed that the students gaining an advantage because of their race had faced the sort of disadvantages common to others of their race–consider children of wealthy minority parents or children of recent immigrants whose families had not been involved in the travesty of slavery or segregation. Likewise, these policies were designed to guarantee that a number of white students would be denied admission to schools for which they were qualified, only because of the color of their skin. In a nation where we are striving to achieve an ideal where people are not judged by the color of their skin, how can we condone overt racial discrimination?

These are vastly difficult questions, because ours is a world in which there are limited resources (limited seats in elite schools, limited jobs in prestigious industries or firms, etc.), and someone will inevitably find themselves missing out on the opportunities they desire. It reminds me somewhat of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon in which Calvin complains to his dad that something is not fair. The dad responds, “Life isn’t fair, Calvin.” And Calvin mutters under his breath, “I know, but why isn’t it ever unfair in my favor?” Of course, in the comic strip the quote was really funny because it was ironic. But there is no irony involved for those who have only been able to transcend racial barriers on the strength of raw determination.

There is plenty else to say on this issue, and I hope to address more points either in future posts or in response to comments on this post, but for me the question finally boiled down to a few simple ideas: We are a nation whose highest and best principles (if not their historically demonstrated ones) are firmly grounded in a philosophy of individual rights rather than notions of entitlement tied to class or social group. In the end, I decided that true fairness will not allow a government actor to intentionally and explicitly create a disadvantage for someone simply because of their skin color or ethnic heritage. If we ever hope to overcome the sordid legacy of racism, it must begin with a firm commitment that no government must ever again condone the notion that a person’s merit or value should ever be dependent on their race or ethnicity. While it is definitely possible that a person’s race or ethnic heritage may have resulted in their holding a unique perspective that a university admissions personnel would properly seek to bring to an incoming freshman class, it is the actual life experiences of the individual applicants that must make the difference in admissions decisions, not their race.

Many, many thanks to all of you who sent up prayers as I was preparing for the Missouri Bar Exam last February. We got word this week that I did, in fact, pass the test. On April 29, I’ll officially be licensed to practice in the state — meaning that Missouri’s freedom-stifling bureaucrats should consider themselves forewarned.

In other news, who remembers the eBay user that pissed me off so heinously by calling me a liar when I had fairly and honestly described my purchasing experience with him? I heard from that guy today, offering to withdraw his negative feedback rating. When I asked him what prompted his decision to withdraw the feedback, he offered this apology:

“You were correct. You provided truthful feedback. I felt bad about the situation, which is why I sent you the feedback rating removal. I definitely apologize for what happened.”

And so, gentle readers, you can all consider his apology accepted.

The third big item of the day is the fact that I missed out on the biggest earthquake to rock the Midwest since 1968! Don’t get me wrong… I have no desire to be in St. Louis when the New Madrid fault trips off the long-expected Big One. But I kind of hate not to have been around for this one because now everyone else will have such fun stories to tell about it and I won’t.

This week, Jenifer and I attended a leadership conference hosted by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Michigan.  Along with all the incredible people we met, we learned about the Blogivist network.  I had long been considering a shift from my Blogger.com location to a new format, and this discovery finally provided the impetus to make the transition.  I’ll keep the old tyrannysucks.blogspot.com site active until I can figure out if it would be possible to import all of the old posts and comments to this site.  I’m looking forward to being part of the Blogivist community!

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that last week saw the arrivals of two new and notable young’uns, one born to each of my best men.

James and Heather Taylor (and their son, Joshua David) welcomed a new daughter, Sydney. Just a few days later, Chris and Tracy Beswick celebrated the birth of their first child, Daphne.

Methinks it will still be a while before Jenifer and I jump on that particular bandwagon, but I can announce that we also had a new addition last week: my new laptop, Trogdor. Not quite as exciting, I know. But until we do have kids, this is just the kind of highlight I have to offer.

Jen and I were in Las Vegas last weekend for a conference, and we got to experience one of the more surreal church services ever. Each Sunday morning, the House of Blues in the Mandalay Bay casino hosts the Gospel Brunch. For $35 and a short wait in line, you get access to a gigantic buffet full of soul food and Cajun dishes, and you also get to be part of an exuberant service of black-church style gospel music.

On the one hand, it was the coolest service I’ve ever attended. It just oozed with talent and style. And the musicians definitely weren’t shy about calling on people to worship Jesus, either. From start to finish, the crowd was exhorted to raise their hands to testify to God’s goodness and grace.

But about twenty minutes into it, I started to get the slightest bit uncomfortable. Interspersed among the trappings of a church service, there would be the occasional, “Are you having a good time?” And every so often there would be reminders that you were in a restaurant, not a house of worship. However sincere the performers were (and I was regularly reminded that they were entertainers), they were being paid to convey an illusion of worship. However sincere some of the audience was (and I do believe that many were earnest in their praises), we were all paying for food and an experience — our money was going to profit a non-religious corporation, not to further any ministry.

So I ended up walking out of the House of Blues pretty conflicted. For as fantastic as the experience was, it was, like so many other things in Vegas, only an imitation of the real thing.

Could you sing all the way through “The Lord’s Prayer” when you were two years old? Yeah, me neither. But this kid can do it.

You know who are a couple of great people? Carl and Shayna, that’s who! They invited Jen and me to come join them in Gatlinburg to share their vacation. And it was fantastic! Over the six days of our visit, we waged epic battles in mini-golf, board games, and card games. We shared some absolutely amazing meals. And we proved our sturdiness on a hike undertaken in, shall we say, less-than-ideal conditions.

First off, the meals. Even though Gatlinburg’s The Peddler has long been a favorite of my grandparents and other family members, I had never eaten there until last week. Now, it has at least tied Perini Ranch (in Buffalo Gap, Texas) as my favorite restaurant. The place has a massive salad bar to get you started off, then a staff member wheels slabs of beef by your table so you can choose your own cut, which they make right in front of you. The ribeye I had there ranks among the best I have ever eaten, and everything else about the place (particularly our seats just above a creek) was tremendous. We also ate a fine meal at the Bear Creek Grill, another creek-side place on the north side of town–I highly recommend their garlic bread (rolls coated in butter, garlic, and parmesean cheese) and their grilled rainbow trout. For a great (and cheap) local breakfast, check out the Mountain Lodge Restaurant, just north of downtown on the parkway.

If you’ve never been to the Sevierville/Pigeon Forge/Gatlinburg metroplex, you might be surprised to know that it is a Mecca for mini golf and go carts. Last week we played a couple of different courses and had a great time on one of the go cart tracks. I highly recommend Ripley’s Davy Crockett Mini-Golf–it’s the best, most entertaining course I’ve ever played. You might also want to check out the nearby Hillbilly Golf. But really, there are any number of excellent putt-putt courses in the area.

Now, for any of you who are Spades players, I have to tell you about the incredible hand that we played on night on the trip. Carl and Shayna had been handily whipping Jen and me (partly because Jen was just learning how to play), so they were on the cusp of victory and we were more than 200 points behind. I bid “blind-nill,” meaning that even before I saw my hand I was committed to trying not to take any tricks–and we would get 200 points if I was successful. Shayna, seated to my left, also bid nill. Jenifer, meanwhile, in order to give us a chance to win in the event that Shayna made her nill bid, bid “ten-for-two,” meaning that our team had to take ten books without any help from me because of the blind-nill bid. Carl bid three. When I looked at the hand I’d been dealt, I was holding the Ace, King, and Ten of Spades, as well as the Ace of Diamonds. Even though I was permitted to give my highest card, the Ace of Spades, to Jen, that was still a plethora of high cards which would make it very difficult to avoid taking any books. Carl ended up taking the first three books, meaning that if Jen and I were to have any chance whatsoever, Jenifer had to take all the remaining books. And, lo and behold, we miraculously pulled it off!! Somehow, both Shayna and I avoided taking any books, Carl met his bid, and Jenifer pulled of the “ten-for-two,” all in the same hand. Jenifer and I ended up winning the game by forty points.

As for the daring hike, we decided to try to climb up to the top of Mt. LeConte, via the Alum Cave Bluff Trail. The weather in Gatlinburg had been excellent for the previous few days, and it was forecast to be beautiful on Wednesday, the day of our hike. But when we got up to the trailhead, the mountains were socked in with clouds and the temperature was hovering in the low fifties. As we ascended the mountain, the temperature dropped quickly, and the wind picked up precipitously. Poor Carl had only brought along a t-shirt, so he would get cold very quickly whenever we weren’t moving along at a brisk pace. By the time we reached the Alum Bluff Cave at over 5000 feet, frigid rain had been pelting us and the clouds were thoroughly obstructing any views we might otherwise have enjoyed. Much as we hated to be quitters, we decided the wisest decision was to head back down to the resort.

So thanks again to Carl and Shayna for inviting us down and being such wonderful hosts and companions! We thoroughly enjoyed our vacation and we look forward to many, many more with our friends.

As my beloved wife will attest (due to my incessant whining), I am no fan of the winter months. I hate cold weather and, unfortunately, the last four years have found me in cities where winters have a way of dragging on… and on… and on…. It hasn’t helped at all that this has been Saint Louis’s coldest, snowiest winter in some time.

So I am just unspeakably thrilled that it looks like spring–and warmer weather–is just about here. As I was walking to the MetroLink (Saint Louis’s light rail) this morning, trees were starting to bud all along the streets. No blossoms yet, but it’s plain that there will be soon. And songbirds have been trickling back into the area for the past couple of weeks as well. SPRING IS AROUND THE CORNER, PEOPLE! GET UP AND CELEBRATE!!!

Allow me to rave, once again, about my incredible wife. For the past couple of weeks, she’s had to deal with my preparation for the Missouri Bar Exam, meaning that I was just generally unavailable to talk or hang out or do as much as I usually do to help keep the house in order. She was patient, loving, and incredibly helpful when it came to my studying, and she topped it all off by getting me a fantastic gift to help me relax now that the bar exam is over and done with… tickets to see the Foo Fighters!

Now, I love me some Foo Fighters. A couple of years ago I got to see them perform in DC with Kaiser Chiefs and Weezer, and that experience definitely tops the list of my favorite concerts. I told everyone within reach at that time that it would be worth going to great lengths to see this band live whenever they’re on tour.

As misfortune would have it, however, this year’s tour did not include any stops within at least a four-hour drive of our home in Saint Louis. I was crushed. I even toyed with making wild trips to Dallas or Nashville in order to catch one of the performances, but all those plans had to go by the wayside due to the fact that most of the “nearby” shows were very inconveniently timed for me. I gave up on the hope that I’d be able to see them on this tour.

In a stroke of blind, crazy luck, though, the scheduled performance in Fayetteville, Arkansas, had to be postponed due to Dave Grohl being ill. The band rescheduled that show for tonight.

I was oblivious to all this, of course. But Jenifer spotted the change in schedule and went above and beyond all expectations by snagging second-row seats for us. So this afternoon we drove the six hours from Saint Louis to Arkansas to take in the show.

As expected, it was awesome. Dave Grohl is a tremendous, energetic, and engaging performer whose motor just keeps running through the entire performance. It was also clear that he felt bad about the previous cancellation (FF has only cancelled three performances in thirteen years of touring), so the band really pulled out the stops to ensure that the concert-goers got their money’s worth. The band played for more than two solid hours, with tunes ranging from amped up renditions of their newer songs, wild, enthusiastic arrangements of older, more familiar tunes, and a healthy dose of quieter, acoustic songs that have been an important part of the past couple of albums.

Of the songs played, I think that “Everlong” and “Times Like These” were probably my favorites. Even though the recent tendency has been to play a slower, acoustic version of “Everlong,” for this night they ripped it out with its original electric ferocity. Even some of their more obscure selections (”Marigold,” “Stacked Actors”) had the audience going nuts.

While I can’t say that tonight’s show was quite the equal of the masterpiece from two years ago, it was an excellent evening and it just reaffirms my commitment relentlessly to pursue opportunities to see these guys again.