I believe that...
...if you claim that you cannot afford an attorney, you will be appointed one and the fact of as to whether or not you can afford to pay for same will be checked into and decided by the Court at some point afterward. I also believe that whether or not you will be declared indigent can be decided from one extreme to the other (i.e. from that you can pay for none of the cost of defending yourself to that you can pay for the entire cost of it), and also that IF you can pay, you likely will have to....some, anyway. The fact that this may be what seems a "financial hardship" to YOU may, and most likely will not matter one whit to the Court. Supplying a lawyer to an indigent defendant is based in making sure that every person has counsel, not that it does not whack him in Ass National, even though in some venues abuse of this policy surely happens, resulting in giving free counsel to people who can afford their own. If I were you, and I had any significant assets and/or income, I would NOT count on being in one of these venues, and I would hire my own lawyer instead of paying what may well turn out to be good money for some overworked, under-resourced, likely inexperienced brand-new-addition-to-the-Bar. You tend to get what you pay for!