Tuesday, March 09, 2004
I may be incurably lexiphanic -- but lexiphanicism for its own sake is not my style.
Bashman plays 20 questions with a judge.
update: two of the responses seem worth discussing further:
judicial salaries:
[howard] 19. Is the salary now paid to federal appellate judges too low? What should federal appellate judges be paid or, perhaps less controversially, how would one determine what the proper salary should be?
[judge] Surely, you jest. There is no question that federal judges are grossly underpaid. The proper salary should be to some extent commensurate with the market, but I don't think that private practice provides a relevant comparator. As a public servant, it would be unrealistic to expect to earn as much as a private-practice attorney. Academia, however, has many more similarities to judicial work. Accordingly, I favor the proposal made by many, most notably Justice Breyer, to raise salaries to a level roughly commensurate with, or even slightly below, those of deans or senior law professors at major law schools.
Short discourse on public choice theory.
When dealing with statements by public officials, and five year olds, we should look not only to the truth value of the statement, but also at the social function of the statement. Not just, is it true, but, who is this useful to, and why.
I have been reading numerous articles by lawyers and judges about why judicial pay is too low. Not much about lawyers' pay being too low. Lawyers set their fees based on economic considerations - what the market will bear. Judges salaries on the other hand, are set by a political rather than economic process.
There is a constituency for lobbying for higher judicial salaries. There is no constituency for lowering judge's salaries.
I could write a screed (rant) about why judicial salaries are way too high already.
Such a rant might have more truth value than the above cited argument, but so what?
What's in it for me, except for the fun ofspeaking truth to power?
If you can't beat 'em, join em. Why judicial salaries should be increased:
Rich old white men are better educated and thus better guardians of our folkways.
Lower salaries might dilute the process, letting in women, minorities, and graduates of non ivy league schools. If saving money were the goal, we could just outsource the work to India, so that we could get decisions in weeks instead of years.
Currently, it takes the taxes of 100 taxpayers (average taxpayer in my census district) to support the salary of one federal judge (not counting her expenses, just salary.)
If this were raised to 200 taxpayers, those taxpayers would have even fewer resources to change the system with.
One overpaid judge can do the work of three judges hired at market rates. Right?
I mean, look at Posner, or Brennan.
Here's an alternative: Open source judging: The parties put their briefs, etc., online.
Anyone can comment. A clerk goes thru the comments, sorting out the 10% quality responses from the spam or rants. Sometimes, consensus emerges. Other times, a case is shown to be more complex than first seems, so easy errors can be refuted.
This takes the amicus concept a step further.
A judge who makes only $100,000/yr (+ pension and benefits) may feel intimidated
by knowing 1% of the population makes more than they do.
By raising salaries, we can attract more of those who put personal avarice above public service. As a libertarian, there's something to be said for that.
(ok, i'm not good at that flavor of mockery)
As someone who has run for judge, I find that there is no shortage of people applying for vacant judgeships. There is an extreme shortage of people willing to run against a sitting judge, but this is mostly due to ballot access barriers- the only people eligible to run are those who risk professional suicide to do so. That seems to be the perception, whether or not it is the reality. When I recruit judicial candidates, I look for people who are retired or tenured or have outside income.
It appears my spacebar and n key were damaged in a recent move. The spacebar would be a coool name for a club for geeks.
Bashman plays 20 questions with a judge.
update: two of the responses seem worth discussing further:
judicial salaries:
[howard] 19. Is the salary now paid to federal appellate judges too low? What should federal appellate judges be paid or, perhaps less controversially, how would one determine what the proper salary should be?
[judge] Surely, you jest. There is no question that federal judges are grossly underpaid. The proper salary should be to some extent commensurate with the market, but I don't think that private practice provides a relevant comparator. As a public servant, it would be unrealistic to expect to earn as much as a private-practice attorney. Academia, however, has many more similarities to judicial work. Accordingly, I favor the proposal made by many, most notably Justice Breyer, to raise salaries to a level roughly commensurate with, or even slightly below, those of deans or senior law professors at major law schools.
Short discourse on public choice theory.
When dealing with statements by public officials, and five year olds, we should look not only to the truth value of the statement, but also at the social function of the statement. Not just, is it true, but, who is this useful to, and why.
I have been reading numerous articles by lawyers and judges about why judicial pay is too low. Not much about lawyers' pay being too low. Lawyers set their fees based on economic considerations - what the market will bear. Judges salaries on the other hand, are set by a political rather than economic process.
There is a constituency for lobbying for higher judicial salaries. There is no constituency for lowering judge's salaries.
I could write a screed (rant) about why judicial salaries are way too high already.
Such a rant might have more truth value than the above cited argument, but so what?
What's in it for me, except for the fun ofspeaking truth to power?
If you can't beat 'em, join em. Why judicial salaries should be increased:
Rich old white men are better educated and thus better guardians of our folkways.
Lower salaries might dilute the process, letting in women, minorities, and graduates of non ivy league schools. If saving money were the goal, we could just outsource the work to India, so that we could get decisions in weeks instead of years.
Currently, it takes the taxes of 100 taxpayers (average taxpayer in my census district) to support the salary of one federal judge (not counting her expenses, just salary.)
If this were raised to 200 taxpayers, those taxpayers would have even fewer resources to change the system with.
One overpaid judge can do the work of three judges hired at market rates. Right?
I mean, look at Posner, or Brennan.
Here's an alternative: Open source judging: The parties put their briefs, etc., online.
Anyone can comment. A clerk goes thru the comments, sorting out the 10% quality responses from the spam or rants. Sometimes, consensus emerges. Other times, a case is shown to be more complex than first seems, so easy errors can be refuted.
This takes the amicus concept a step further.
A judge who makes only $100,000/yr (+ pension and benefits) may feel intimidated
by knowing 1% of the population makes more than they do.
By raising salaries, we can attract more of those who put personal avarice above public service. As a libertarian, there's something to be said for that.
(ok, i'm not good at that flavor of mockery)
As someone who has run for judge, I find that there is no shortage of people applying for vacant judgeships. There is an extreme shortage of people willing to run against a sitting judge, but this is mostly due to ballot access barriers- the only people eligible to run are those who risk professional suicide to do so. That seems to be the perception, whether or not it is the reality. When I recruit judicial candidates, I look for people who are retired or tenured or have outside income.
It appears my spacebar and n key were damaged in a recent move. The spacebar would be a coool name for a club for geeks.
Comments:
Post a Comment
