Those "poor" federal judges!
Article referencing our newest member to the US Supreme Court-Chief Justice John Roberts and some controversial statements attributed to him about federal judges. Fits nicely with our new unit and some of you eager "pre-law" students may be curious about financial security as a federal judge.
Outside Court, Roberts Hears Dissent
Mr. Thompson
3 Comments:
I responded with the same criticism as Nick. "Constitutional crisis?!" Give me a break! I would argue the real crisis is the $5.15 minimum wage that hasn't changed since 1997. Its value, due to inflation, is $4.04, compared to the full $5.15 in 1997. Luckily, the House has taken care of it and it is almost guaranteed passage in the Senate.
Let the Congress address the real issues...the ones that gave the Democrats the majority. Minimum wage hike, stem-cell initiatives, ethics reform, ending the War in Iraq...these issues more closely resemble a "crisis".
Of course, not letting Congress off the hook (the 109th and before, that is) they have given themselves pay raises for 5 years in a row. However, Speaker of the House receives a $212,000 yearly salary, the same as the Supreme Court Chief Justice. Rank-and-file members of Congress make $165,00, the same as the other Federal Judges.
Who is to say that John Roberts deserves any more for his work than does Nancy Pelosi?
I had always believed that Chief Justice Roberts was very smart and articulate. However, his statements on this issue make him seem out of touch.
I don't think that he really NEEDs a pay raise, by any stretch of the mind.
Why mess with the minimum wage when most companies pay their workers more than that anyhow?
Andrew
Because many companies still do, especially small businesses. Even if it is going to end up costing them more, $5.15 is unacceptable in 2007.
Plus, raising the minimum wage generally bumps up wages even above minimum. So the measly $7.75ish you and I earn at Target would be raised as to keep wages competitive.
Post a Comment
<< Home