Columnist John Stossel has voiced frustration with the New York state court system, describing his recent jury duty experience as a demonstration of bureaucratic indifference and inefficiency. Stossel, a proponent of market-based solutions, contrasted the court's methods with the constant improvements seen in private industries.
In his account, Stossel detailed receiving a paper summons via mail, a method he contrasted with the instant digital communications common in the business world. Upon arriving at the courthouse, he described delays, broken amenities like water coolers, and lengthy waits before being given forms. He noted that while businesses are incentivized by competition to improve customer service and reduce wait times, government bureaucracies like the courts lack such competitive pressures.
The process for selecting potential jurors for a criminal trial involved being moved between buildings and extensive waiting periods. Stossel likened the experience to an airline informing passengers their flight was delayed by several days. He also pointed out the continued use of manual stenography for court transcription, despite the availability of instant, accurate speech-to-text technology.
Stossel cited economist Milton Friedman's theory on spending money to explain government inefficiency, suggesting that when people spend others' money on others, there is little concern for cost or quality. He argued that while some court officials may work hard, the system itself provides no reward for saving people's time.
His experience involved approximately 80 prospective jurors waiting for at least six hours, equating to a significant loss of work time. Stossel suggested simpler innovations, such as staggered arrival times or using text messages to summon jurors, could improve efficiency. He concluded that government bureaucracies often operate as if wasting citizens' time has no cost, when in reality, it results in lost human progress and missed opportunities.