[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 109 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1552]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


           AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY AND FEDERAL JUDICIAL PAY

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 29, 1997

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am attaching a copy of two important 
resolutions adopted by the United Conference of Mayors, at their 
meeting in San Francisco last month. These resolutions reflect strong 
support across the country for protecting a cornerstone of our 
democracy--an independent judiciary. The Conference also recognizes 
that to preserve an independent judiciary Federal judges must be 
adequately and fairly compensated. I encourage Members to take a moment 
to review these resolutions. Federal judges have not received a pay 
increase since 1993, therefore, I also urge Members to support a salary 
increase for Federal judges which will help ensure an effective and 
independent judiciary; and reject legislation that seeks to undermine 
the judiciary's integrity:

              Resolution No. 43: An Independent Judiciary

      Submitted by: The Honorable Dennis Archer, Mayor of Detroit

       Whereas, an independent judiciary is a fundamental part of 
     our system of democracy; and
       Whereas, in recognition of the need to preserve judicial 
     independence, Article III of the United States Constitution 
     provides for lifetime tenure for federal judges and indicates 
     that they can only be removed from office for ``Treason, 
     Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors''; and
       Whereas, judges are required to decide cases based upon the 
     evidence presented and the applicable law, regardless of the 
     political popularity of those decisions; and
       Whereas, this doctrine of judicial independence enshrined 
     in our Constitution and laws has made the courts of this 
     country the protectors of the politically weak and unpopular; 
     and
       Whereas, in August 1993 the National Commission on Judicial 
     Discipline and Removal which was created by the United States 
     Congress reported that while from time to time various 
     federal judges have been removed from office for specific 
     acts of official or personal misconduct, Congress has never 
     removed a federal judge from office simply because it 
     disagreed with his or her judicial decisions; and
       Whereas, it appears that certain members of Congress who 
     disagree with the judicial decisions rendered by various 
     federal judges are threatening to use the congressional 
     impeachment power to remove those judges from the bench; and
       Whereas, such threats chill the independence of the 
     judiciary and violate the separation of powers doctrine 
     contained in the United States Construction by substituting 
     congressional use of the impeachment power for the 
     constitutional process of appellate review of judicial 
     decisions; and
       Whereas, the threat by certain members of Congress to 
     institute impeachment proceedings against federal judges 
     whose decisions they find politically unpopular is an attempt 
     to undermine the separation of powers doctrine contained in 
     the United States Constitution by subordinating objective and 
     rational legal decision making to popular political whims; 
     and
       Whereas, it further appears that certain members of the 
     Senate are attempting to prevent action by that body on the 
     confirmation of various judicial nominations which have been 
     submitted to the Senate; and
       Whereas, it appears that this refusal to act on judicial 
     nominations is based on concerns regarding the nominees' 
     political ideology rather than concerns regarding the 
     nominees' legal qualifications or ability to perform the 
     duties of the office to which they were appointed; and
       Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that The United States 
     Conference of Mayors affirms its support for a strong and 
     independent federal judiciary; and
       Be it further Resolved that The United States Conference of 
     Mayors calls upon the Senate and in particular the Senate 
     Judiciary Committee to handle judicial confirmation 
     proceedings in an objective and expeditious matter.
       Projected Cost: None


       
                                  ____
                    Resolution No. 42: Judicial Pay

      Submitted by: The Honorable Dennis Archer, Mayor of Detroit

       Whereas a strong and independent federal judiciary is 
     important to our nation's system of democracy; and
       Whereas, as indicated by Senator Orrin G. Hatch: ``If we 
     are to attract and retain the most capable lawyers to serve 
     as federal judges, it is vitally important that we ensure 
     that those responsible for the effective functioning of the 
     judicial branch receive fair compensation, including 
     reasonable adjustments, which allow judicial salaries to keep 
     pace with increases in the cost of living;'' and
       Whereas, adequate compensation for federal judges helps to 
     insure that our judiciary is reflective of the whole of our 
     society. As indicated by Judge Barefoot Sanders: ``We enjoy a 
     pluralism in the judiciary that is enriched by diverse 
     backgrounds in race, gender, and religion, as well as prior 
     careers and expertise. If judicial salaries are frozen, our 
     judiciary would face a different future if we desire to 
     continue the pluralism and competence we presently enjoy;'' 
     and
       Whereas, federal judges have not received a pay increase or 
     adjustment since 1993; and
       Whereas, salary increases and adjustments for federal 
     judges are statutorily linked to those for members of the 
     United States Congress and the President of the United 
     States; and
       Whereas, unlike those elected officials, members of the 
     federal judiciary are appointed to a lifetime term of office; 
     and
       Whereas, in his 1996 Year End Report on the Judiciary, 
     Chief Justice Rehnquist said: ``The significance of Congress' 
     failing both to repeal Section 140 and to grant an ECI 
     adjustment to judges' salaries cannot be overstated in terms 
     of its effect on the morale and quality of the federal 
     judiciary. Section 140 jeopardizes the ability to retain and 
     recruit to the Judiciary the most capable lawyers from all 
     socio-economic classes and geographic areas, including high 
     cost-of-living urban areas. We must insure that judges, who 
     make a lifetime commitment to public service, are able to 
     plan their financial futures based on reasonable 
     expectations;'' and
       Whereas, both the House and Senate have before them bills 
     sponsored by the Chairman of the House and Senate Judiciary 
     Committees and co-sponsored by the Ranking Members that, if 
     adopted, would:
       Give federal judges a ``catch-up'' pay adjustment;
       Sever the linkage between judicial, congressional and 
     executive schedule compensation and substitute a provision 
     linking adjustments to the pay of federal judges to the 
     mechanism for adjusting the general schedule pay rates of 
     other career government employees; and
       Repeal Section 140 of Public Law No. 97-92 that makes 
     judicial cost-of-living pay increases subject to 
     Congressional approval.
       Now, therefore, be it Resolved that The United States 
     Conference of Mayors supports the legislation that will 
     adjust, and provide a procedure for the future adjustment of, 
     the salaries of federal judges and urges its speedy adoption.
       Projected Cost: Unknown

       

                          ____________________