Senate decides law need not apply to judges
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED JUNE 1, 2001
THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
Providing for our betters
Senate decides law need not apply to judges
The Nevada state constitution is clear: State officeholders are not to enjoy raises in pay till they've returned to the polls to face the voters.
The Legislators can enact all the pay raises they like; those raises just don't go into effect for incumbent officeholders (who knew the rules going in, running for the job at the earlier rate of pay) till voters confirm by returning to the polls that they think the incumbent should remain in office at the new, enhanced salary.
But Nevada's Supreme Court justices don't like this arrangement. Boy, do they ever not like it. They know better than the state Constitution, you see; they've determined they should all make the new, higher rates of pay from the day they're enacted.
Lawmakers used to honor this high-handed demand, equalizing judicial salaries by giving lower-paid justices extra money for serving on the Pardons Board and on the Board of Law Library trustees. But that scam was stopped by the Legislature in 1995, after then-Chief Justice Tom Steffen ruled the practice of augmenting salaries was unconstitutional.
What did the justices do next? In the spring of 1997, former Supreme Court administrator Don Mello denied responsibility for hiding a judicial pay raise from lawmakers in a court equipment request, saying all five justices agreed to the phony entry.
Mr. Mello at the time e-mailed most state lawmakers a copy of a letter he sent via fax to Supreme Court Justice Mirim Shearing. The letter said in part, "If you will recall, it was at the court's direction (all five members present as well as the court clerk) that an entry was made in the budget for 'digital equipment.' "
Oh dear oh dear. Caught again. Whatever do you suppose the underpaid guys and gals in the black dresses decided to try next?
When all else fails, go back to the tried and true. This week the state Senate passed Senate Bill 184, giving Supreme Court justices a 30 percent raise and authorizing payment of all members of the court at the same $140,000 salary, by the handy mechanism of authorizing the extra pay for "underpaid" justices for their service on -- you guessed it -- various "law library commissions."
Hey, Nevadans understand gambling. Why not pick a handful of taxpayers at random and hand them $32,400 per year to sit in a few meetings a year? How hard can it be? "Yes, I believe I shall now cast my vote to stock the law libraries with, oh, you know ... law books."
We'll even buy chances at 25 cents apiece -- heck, use the proceeds to set up a home for aging mob attorneys.
For starters, these 30 percent raises, to $140,000 per year, are outrageously excessive. Even if the long-suffering jurists have to eat cold cereal for supper for a few years between such pay hikes, how many of the taxpayers who foot the bill for these whopping salaries have seen their own paychecks jump by 65 percent in the past six years?
Yes, I said 65 percent. Just six years ago, Supreme Court justices in Nevada were pulling down $85,000 per year ... and there seemed to be no shortage of candidates for the office. (I was tempted to add "qualified," but since the first qualification would have to be quoting the 9th and 10th Amendments from memory, maybe we'd better just leave that for another day.) In 1995, the Legislature boosted that rate of pay to $107,600.
Still not enough? Let's try $140,000. At this rate, any bets on how soon the justices will be taking home $200,000 ... plus benefits?
And meantime, the Legislature now proposes to legitimize, formalize, and institutionalize these back-door "interim" pay increases for justices who ran for office at the lower rate of pay, blatantly circumventing the will of the voters and the purpose and intent of the law?
The law.
Apparently the senators feel no obligation to actually obey the law, or to insist the justices do so. The law, you see, is to be obeyed only when convenient.
Tell that the the kindly officer the next time you're pulled over. Surely he'll understand. Unless you're -- you know -- a peasant or something.
Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Subscribe to his monthly newsletter by sending $72 to Privacy Alert, 1475 Terminal Way, Suite E for Easy, Reno, NV 89502 -- or dialing 775-348-8591. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available at 1-800-244-2224, or via web site www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.
Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com
"When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right." -- Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926)
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken
