The Rule Of Law OR Of Lawyers???

RULE OF LAW OR OF LAWYERS

One of the pride-filled statements of those who live within our
Anglo-American systems of government is that we live “not under the rule of men, but that of laws”. More-and-more I wonder if that is true. Each year it appears that we live under the “rule-of-lawyers” and not within any other structure or constraints.

Our laws (Including “rules” and “regulations”) have become so many, so complex and so convoluted that it is all but impossible to carry out even daily tasks without paying (Or paying off) some lawyer. This is most specially true in the production of real goods and services so basic to the economy. (Perhaps, the real economic advantage of such nations as Japan and China is their relative lack of attorneys.)

It is hard to think of any class of persons, in the USA who produce less for and drain more from the real economy than do lawyers. (Even stock brokers, as a smaller group of persons, do less harm that those, too often self-serving, agents and abusers of the law.) Lawyers, in fact, craft our laws, rules and regulations and, as far as I can determine, make an effort to do so t in such a manner as to ensure the full employment of other attorneys.

[One of the worst abuses inflicted on the People of the USA is that trial attorneys, especially in “class actions”, all too often suck up most of the judgments awarded.]

After all, attorneys already control one of our three branches of government (The judiciary) and should not have a lock on controlling the legislative or, even, the administrative branches of government.

There are some possible solutions, among which are:
1.Pass a Constitution amendment making, after ten years from approval, the prior possession of a law degree a disqualification to hold any legislative position in the Congress or the legislatures of the Several States;
2.Pass another amendment limiting the total number of words in
the laws, regulations and rules of the Federal government to ten million (At ten characters/numbers for each word; With like restrictions (With a smaller limit) for the governments each of the Several States);
3.Require, by whatever means, that all such laws, rules and regulations be “passed” by the majority of a jury of randomly chosen citizens, none with a law degree, as understandable to persons of average intelligence and education;
4.Require that, in all lawsuits, the attorneys on the “winning side” are not to receive more than 40% of the moneys awarded as fees or for costs of legal actions;
5.Require that all settlements made in our civil courts be made public even if such are made before a verdict is given;
6.Shut down all Law Schools for not less than five-years (To eliminate the current excess of lawyers and to adjust for the solutions above), And,
7.Require that the “loser” in suits-at-law pay the costs and attorneys and other fees of the “winner”; And, that any person who fails to do so would be barred from further suits for 20-years (However, awards made by arbitrators or referees would not be so regulated as the cost in such case are generally far less than in court cases, require the agreement of all parties and are not a burden on our courts and, therefore, our tax payers).

Of course, there is the alternative represented by a theme in one of Robert E. Heinlein's novels, referred to as “The Year We Killed All The Attorneys”.