Eliminating Bail is Like Outlawing Ladders

The Parable
In a faraway land there existed the Kingdom of Social Justice. The kingdom had a tumultuous history. But, progress towards equality was a hallmark of which the kingdom rightfully took pride. Just like a grandfather clock, each kingdom has a pendulum of political will. It swings left and then it swings right and then it swings left again. And so on. Some kingdoms are wound tighter than others. Which is why pendulums in differing kingdoms rarely keep time with each other for long. This story takes place when the kingdom's pendulum had passed the 7 and was approaching the 8.

The ministers of the Kingdom of Social Justice enjoyed attending conferences. They enjoyed the camaraderie of each other's company, and the meals, and the outings, and the many people who gathered and told them how important they were and how much they were loved. Many of the conferences the ministers attended were sponsored and hosted by a very wealthy social engineer from another kingdom. The social engineer lavished money and resources for all attendees of the conferences. But, the social engineer never allowed his own name to be attached to a conference. Instead, the social engineer sought others to take credit for the conferences. And many others did take credit. They were happy to have their projects supported by a wealthy social engineer from another kingdom.

In a neighboring kingdom, a man worked for an employer. The man, like most of the subjects of the Kingdom of Social Justice believed that employers are wealthy and workers are poor. One day, the man climbed a ladder to perform a part of the job for which the man was employed. While on the ladder, the man suffered a heart attack, and fell from the ladder. Later, the man died.

News of the man's death reached the conference organizers in the Kingdom of Social Justice and they were sad. They were saddened not only because of the loss and pain the man's family must have felt, but because the man was poor (he had to have been because he worked) and he suffered his ailment while on a ladder. They felt the burn of injustice that a poor man may be required to climb a ladder from which a fall might occur.

Some time later, news reached the conference organizers that another person in a different kingdom was injured in a fall from a ladder. The injured person was stretching to reach something and his leaning body weight caused the ladder to slip from position. Again, the organizers were sad and unrest began to grow.

Sometime after the second ladder incident, news reached the organizers of yet another tragedy involving a ladder. This time, a woman used a ladder to climb from a third story rooftop to a 6th story adjacent rooftop. While atop the taller building, she jumped to her death leaving behind a suicide note. The organizers were awash with grief and anger.

At the next conference, attendees demanded that the ministers solve the problem of death and injury caused by ladders. As the attendees discussed the recently reported tragedies they described the problem as one of injustice and one that must be fixed—now. The good ministers agreed with the attendees and promised to draft legislation that would permanently correct this unjust situation.

The ministers were not experts in the use of ladders and did not know how to eliminate falls from ladders. The wealthy social engineer from a foreign kingdom helped the ministers find a solution. The social engineer introduced the ministers to professors and recent graduates of the University of Scaffolding Science and Technology. The social engineer knew about the university because it was one of the many projects he had contributed funds to for many years.

The ministers consulted with academics from the University of Scaffolding Science and Technology. But the academics said that they couldn't help find a solution unless they could do in-depth research—the kind of research that could only be produced under a consulting contract. The ministers agreed and awarded numerous and lucrative consulting contracts to the academics who now became consultants.

Finally, after many years, many contracts, and millions of zorbs (the kingdom's currency) were paid to the consultants, they presented a recommendation—eliminate all ladders from use. Instead, create new Departments of Scaffolding in each county of the kingdom.

The departments will investigate every situation where required work can't be performed from the ground. In conducting its duties, the departments will determine (1) if elevation from the ground is required; (2) if so, then prescribe the dimensions of scaffolding to be placed; and (3) recommend additional safety features, such as railing, extra wide platforms, or whether a harness should be required to be worn by employees on the scaffolding.

The consultants further recommended that departments of scaffolding's findings should be presented to the county or city planning commission. It will be the planning commission's job to order such recommendations to occur on the job site. Once the order is made, the department of scaffolding will construct the scaffolding and monitor its use.

In the event that a planning commission disagreed with the department of scaffolding, it may only order the use of a ladder if done so on the record, articulating the specific reasons why the recommendation is to be ignored.

A particularly astute minister asked, "wouldn't such a system be very expensive"? The consultants scoffed and demanded that the minister inquire as to what the cost to society is when a worker falls from a ladder and injures himself, or worse. "Isn't that worth more than counting mere zorbs?" they ask. Besides, they assert, "ladder sellers should not be allowed to grow rich from exploiting the poor who are forced to climb ladders."

The minister pressed, "But won't completion time for projects be significantly delayed by this system?" The consultants retorted, "Sure, some projects might experience an initial delay, but there will be huge efficiency savings by not having to climb up and down ladders only to move them."

Two ministers were so enthused that they introduced bills in both houses of their bicameral legislative system.

And the pendulum continues to swing.


Epilogue

Might this parable be far-fetched? I think not.

Currently pending in the California Legislature are two bills that seek to eliminate the ability of an arrestee from posting bail (SB 10 and AB 42). In it's place, each county will be required to create a pretrial department that will interview every arrested person and recommend the level of monitoring. Two days later, the judge will receive the recommendations and order the conditions she feels is appropriate. If the judge disagrees with the recommendations, then she must state so on the record and the specific reasons why. The defendant may not be charged any fees for monitoring or any conditions imposed. If the defendant is accused of a violent crime, in some cases, even a misdemeanor, the defendant is not to be reviewed for release recommendations.

There's a lot more to the bills, but for now, what matters is that it will cost California about $3 billion per year more than what the current system costs. And, a large number of defendants will not be eligible for release—even before conviction. How does that further the rights of an accused under the presumption of innocence doctrine?