September 14, 2006Ludicrous!The Pennsylvania Supreme Court just threw a gallon of diesel on a simmering Pennsylvania flame. Yes, the pay raise.
The court ordered judges' pay to return to the level it was at in November, before a four-month-old pay-raise law was repealed in the wake of widespread public anger. The justices also said the Legislature violated the state Constitution by permitting its members to accept midterm pay raises in the form of "unvouchered expenses." The "public anger" could account for over thirty retirements, and does account for the defeat of a Supreme Court justice as well as seventeen primary election defeats, including that of House and Senate leaders. The reason why the judges (including the Supreme Court) can keep their raise is because Pennsylvania law prohibits a judges salary from going down. This is to prevent a scorned legislature from cutting the Judiciary's pay. Now the issue is back on the front pages as the election draws near. The legislators who survived the May primaries will now worry, as will Governor Ed Rendell who signed the pay raise bill "to kiss a little butt," and State Treasurer Bob Casey (running against Senator Rick Santorum) who was against the pay raise before he was for it. This will be interesting. Pennsylvania Posted by AlexC at September 14, 2006 4:50 PM |
Is the prohibition on reduction of judicial salaries a constitutional provision? If not, what keeps a scorned legislature from just changing that law along with the salaries?
Jeez, Colorado state politics is childs play compared to PA!
Posted by: johngalt at September 14, 2006 6:02 PMYes. Constitutional, I will correct that.
Posted by: AlexC at September 14, 2006 8:32 PMI suspect the complexity of a states politics is directly proportional to it's border complexity. ;)
Posted by: AlexC at September 14, 2006 8:33 PMThose Hawaiians are some bare-knuckle fighters...
Posted by: jk at September 15, 2006 2:12 PM | What do you think? [4]