Reid Drops Federal Judge Pay Raise Trojan Horse Into Auto Bailout Bill, AP Spins, Calling it “Important”

Just when you thought Congress had learned its lesson from the last two national elections, frivolous “earmark” bill riders are back. It might seem foolhardy for the Senate to even consider granting pay raises to Federal Employees in the midst of a deep recession, but that’s exactly what Harry Reid intends to do. In what appears to be a brazen maneuver to reward political allies for their ongoing support, the Senate Majority Leader is attaching an upward Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for Federal Judges to the $14 Billion Auto Bailout Plan.

An inquisitive journalist might question Reid’s wisdom in using the already unpopular, but seemingly inevitable, “Big 3” Rescue Bill as the vehicle for a bold political payoff. After all, District Judges currently make close to $170,000 per year, far more than the average American taxpayer earns. Given the current state of the economy, an honest reporter could conclude that the last person worthy of a pay increase during a recession is a high-salaried Federal Employee whose compensation is not tied to any economic growth. Unfortunately, AP’s Andrew Taylor made no such determination.

Instead, Taylor went through the contortions of justifying this abuse of power. Apparently Federal Judges are supposed to earn salaries on a par with Members of Congress, but while annual Congressional Cost of Living Adjustments kick in automatically, a floor vote is required for judicial pay increases. According to the article, the Senate voted in favor of the upward adjustment for Federal Judges in a stand-alone bill in November. However, the House, citing populist concerns, failed to act accordingly. Taylor picks up from here (emphasis mine)…

As a result, Reid has taken the unusual step of linking the obscure but important judicial pay issue to the unpopular auto bailout.

Suggesting that a pay rise for Federal Judges is “important” is ridiculous enough on its face, especially during a global economic crisis. Yet Taylor proceeds to dig himself into a deeper hole (emphasis mine)...

There is concern among many policymakers that judges are not paid enough relative to the importance of their offices, and in six of the past 13 years, judges have been denied their pay raise as lawmakers opted not to take their own COLA.

Taylor may want to consider that while a handful of unnamed “policymakers” claim that judges are underpaid, the average American (especially now) harbors no such concern. Besides, isn’t a bit rich to be asking Americans to make personal sacrifices, to accept tax increases and to learn to “spread the wealth” around to close a deficit when an action like this only serves to increase that deficit? And certainly the question of what constitutes greed might be appropriate, given the circumstances? Oddly, Taylor laments that judges have been denied “their” pay raise, as opposed to “a” pay raise, in 6 of the last 13 years…as if the judges were entitled to an annual increase. So, Congress decides to put the interests of the American taxpayer above its own interest in less than half of the last 13 years, but the real tragedy is that a bunch of judges on six-figure incomes only got pay increases more than half the time? But wait, there’s more…

Even with the raise, judges earn far less than lawyers at big firms, just as members of Congress make less than many lobbyists.

Some might argue that judges actually earn far less than they are paid. The incomes of private attorneys and of lobbyists are usually tied to the revenue their efforts generate. Not so with judges and Congressmen, their salaries constitute net costs. If judges are so concerned about how little they’re making relative to lawyers at big firms, they may want to consider joining one of those practices. But isn’t public service supposed to carry an intrinsic value that trumps any monetary reward? The simple fact is that some people prefer job security, implied authority and an impressive title to the opportunity to maximize their incomes…that’s why they choose to be judges or Members of Congress rather than litigators or lobbyists. Why bother hustling for business or chasing down delinquent clients when you can enjoy the fruits of a steady, guaranteed six-figure income and the public deference granted to those in positions of power? But even if Reid’s Trojan Horse tactic fails, taxpayers are probably still going to be on the hook for the pay raise…

If the pay measure fails to go through this year, judges are likely to get the increase as one of the first pieces of business next year.

While one might be inclined to congratulate Andrew Taylor for taking on the nearly-impossible task of justifying Harry Reid’s cynical earmark, his efforts fall short. Reid’s flagrant indifference to the will of the people cannot be spun. Expect the media to bury stories like this over the next two years. After all, Reid is up for re-election in 2010.