On The Auction Block

On The Auction Block

WebsterHNN

'Responding to a private plea from Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist for "economic relief" for judges, leading Senate Republicans have inserted a provision in a pending appropriations bill that would end an 11-year ban on speaking fees for members of the federal judiciary.' - Washington Post

Read the entire story:
Bill Would End Ban on Honoraria For Judges

Economic relief? For men and women who know what the salary is of the job before they take it? What about all the people in the US living at or below poverty level because they can't find a salaried job?

Sounds to me like Lil' Anthony and the Supremes want the same action that is happening inside the beltway of DC. And why not? Most if not all of congress is on the take….we know both presidential candidates on both party tickets are on the take…..we have seen the same thing in West Virginia …..everyone is on the take!

So we should not be surprised when the judges who hold the highest judicial office in the country hold out their hand and say….. "I can't exist on what my salary is, so I want more pay…..and I will either get it through the federal government in pay increments (paltry as it would be) or I'll ask that congress lift the ban on honoraria so I can be just like everyone else in DC.!"

What is wrong with this picture? Look at these stats from the Washington Post:

'The annual salary of the U.S. chief justice is $181,400, and the eight associates make $173,600. The salaries of federal appellate court judges and district judges are $150,000 and $141,300, respectively.

In addition, federal judges may earn up to $21,195 a year from outside sources, such as teaching, but not from honoraria for speeches. The judges may also accept all-expenses-paid travel and accommodations at educational or professional events.

In 1995, the Wall Street Journal detailed the extended expenses-paid trips of a number of Supreme Court justices to the French Riviera, the Austrian Alps, Spain and other watering spots.

A number of the justices are millionaires with substantial assets; but according to their latest financial disclosure reports, some of the poorest are the conservative members of the court.

Justice Antonin Scalia's assets were valued below $535,000; Justice Clarence Thomas reported assets worth between $150,000 and $410,000; and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was the poorest, with assets valued below $195,000.

McConnell did not mention that fact in a letter sent earlier in the year to Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who chairs the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that draws up the annual spending bill for the federal judiciary.'------Washington Post September 14, 2000

I can't imagine trying to exist on $173,600 - $181,400. What was congress thinking limiting them to that pocket change? It's a wonder they aren't lined up at the local welfare office asking for food stamps, utility bill help and housing vouchers.

Could it be that congress was trying to have or show some respectability when it comes to payola? Limiting it only to themselves….because they know the old axiom twisted just a tad is so true…..

Absolute Power Corrupts…..Absolutely……but in this case….Absolute Payola Corrupts….ABSOLUTELY!

They, meaning congress, probably thought that even though they get away with it from the chemical, oil, pharmaceutical, insurance, healthcare etc. industries…that Lil' Anthony and The Supremes should be the last bastion of propriety.

Now this begs some questions be asked and answered:

Say that one of the stalwart Supremes takes an honoraria from any of the above listed types of business (or any other businesses who are bagmen in DC) then a citizen who has been unduly harmed by any of those types of businesses, files suit and it ends up in the Supreme Court. Will we see those particular Supreme's recuse themselves? Will we see them stay silent because after all how will we, the private citizen, know if they just returned from an invitation to speak to a group of lawyers on the law (read - all expense paid vacation to Aruba)?

How will we know for sure if their decision is totally based on the law or due to a tenderheartedness to the last company that handed them an honoraria check for their "speaking engagement".

Remember that there are 3 CO-EQUAL branches of the government and it was the Supremes who made soft money legal….The Buckley Decision. So why not go to one of the biggest, if not the biggest taker's of PAC money in DC, Sen. Mitch McConnell, (R) KY, to introduce corruption into the highest judicial system in America.

If judges should be permitted to take money from entities that may end up having interests before the courts, then maybe we should permit health department inspectors to accept free meals from restaurants, college sports referees should be able to take Las Vegas junkets from bookmakers, members of the National Transportation and Safety Board should be able to enjoy Ski vacations in Sun Valley paid for by Ford and Firestone all the while, Environmental Protection Agency inspectors should be able to lounge on the beaches of the Caribbean at the expense of oil companies, chemical companies or other polluters of the water, soil and air without the fear of appearances of impropriety.

This reminds me of auctions that I attend where livestock is put up on the block to the highest bidder…. and once purchased…the new owner can do whatever they please with their new found property.

Yes, Absolute Power (Money) Corrupts…Absolutely!

HNN Home

WebsterHNN