[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 24374-24375]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   AUTHORIZING A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3711, introduced earlier 
today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 3711) to authorize a cost of living adjustment 
     for the Federal judiciary.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise to express support for a bill 
introduced by myself, the minority leader, and others to provide a 
cost-of-living salary adjustment to Federal judges.
  The Framers of our Constitution were men of great vision and 
foresight. One of their great innovations was the establishment of an 
independent judiciary, which is to function as a coequal branch of 
government.
  The Framers knew that justice and the rule of law would only prevail 
if judges are free from executive and legislative interference. In 
order to preserve the autonomy of judges, the Framers established 
safeguards. One of these safeguards was the assurance that judicial pay 
could not be diminished during a judge's service on the bench. This 
safeguard was important enough that it was included in the first 
section of article III of the Constitution.
  Unfortunately, in terms of real dollars, we in Congress have allowed 
judicial pay to dwindle. Since 1969, the salaries of Federal judges 
have significantly declined when adjusted for inflation. The Office of 
the United States Courts estimates judicial pay has declined by 25 
percent.
  Preserving judicial integrity is a bipartisan goal. Earlier this 
Congress a bipartisan bill was put forward which would have given 
judges a long-awaited pay raise. The Federal Judicial Salary 
Restoration Act of 2008 would have brought judicial salaries more 
closely in line with what the position merits. Although this bill had 
support on both sides of the aisle, we were unable to pass it this 
year. We will return to that proposal in the very near future.
  The bill we have introduced today simply provides a cost-of-living 
increase for this year. I favor a proposal, included in the Salary 
Restoration Act, which would guarantee judges a cost-of-living 
adjustment every year. But at the very least, we must provide such an 
increase for this year.
  Between 1993 and 2001, the Federal judiciary has received only three 
out of eight proposed cost-of-living adjustments. Because of Congress's 
failure to act, judicial pay has declined relative to the rest of the 
economy, and judicial independence is threatened. It is time we stop 
allowing judicial pay to diminish.
  If we are to preserve the judicial independence envisioned by our 
country's Founders, we must not allow judicial pay to continue to ebb. 
Passage of this bill would be a small downpayment on the more 
meaningful steps we need to take to treat judges with the respect they 
deserve.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, at the very beginning of the 110th 
Congress, I joined with Senators Reid, Specter, Feinstein, and Cornyn 
to pass legislation to authorize a cost-of-living adjustment, COLA, for 
the salaries of U.S. Justices and judges for fiscal year 2007. Now as 
we wrap up this session, we are again compelled to take remedial 
action, because a COLA for our Federal judiciary was not included in 
the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2009.
  Earlier today, we attempted to pass a bipartisan bill to repeal the 
section of the U.S. Code that is a barrier to Federal judges receiving 
an automatic cost-of-living adjustment. The Administrative Office of 
the United States Courts notes that when adjusted for inflation the pay 
rate for Federal judges has declined by 25 percent since 1969. In 1975, 
Congress enacted the Executive Salary Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act, 
intended to give judges, Members of Congress, and other high-ranking 
executive branch officials automatic COLAs as accorded other Federal 
employees unless rejected by Congress. However, in 1981, Congress 
enacted section 140 of Public Law 97-92, mandating specific 
congressional action to give COLAs to judges. This action has resulted 
in judges failing to receive a cost-of-living adjustment when other 
Federal employees have received one. Unfortunately, there was an 
objection on the other side of the aisle that prevented passage of the 
measure to repeal this antiquated section and to ensure that the wages 
of our Federal judges can keep up with inflation.
  The bipartisan legislation we are now trying to move provides a COLA 
for Federal judges consistent with the law and with fairness. I hope 
that this measure, providing judges with a COLA for fiscal year 2009, 
can pass by both sides of the aisle by unanimous consent. I had 
sincerely hoped that we could have passed a more comprehensive judicial 
pay bill this Congress given all the work we dedicated to the issue in 
the Judiciary Committees of both the Senate and the House of 
Representatives but at a minimum we should not allow judicial salaries 
to slip even further behind.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, a strong and independent judiciary is 
essential to the administration of justice in our country.
  It is my understanding that the Senate has been unable to clear 
bipartisan legislation introduced by Senators Reid and McConnell which 
would repeal the requirement that Congress specially authorize a cost-
of-living increase each year for the Federal judiciary. Repealing this 
provision, which is known as section 140, would in essence ensure that 
Federal judges are treated in the same manner as Members of Congress 
regarding salary adjustments.
  I am disappointed that this bipartisan effort is being blocked, but I 
am pleased that the Senate is expected to pass another measure, which I 
have cosponsored, that would provide a cost-of-living increase to 
judges for at least the next year. Without this fix, Members of 
Congress will receive a COLA increase in January along with most of the 
Federal workforce, but not the judiciary. I don't see any reasonable 
justification for giving Members of Congress and the Federal workforce 
a cost-of-living increase and denying the judiciary a similar 
adjustment.
  There are ongoing discussions about the extent we should provide for 
an overall increase in judicial compensation, but the issue we are 
discussing today isn't about making major adjustments to judicial 
salaries. I support reforming judicial salaries, and I hope the next 
Congress will be able to pass legislation to this end, but in the 
meantime I believe it is important that we don't deny the judiciary a 
reasonable cost-of-living increase.

[[Page 24375]]

  Leaving the judiciary behind would be wrongheaded and shortsighted. 
By denying these dedicated public servants adequate compensation, we 
are making it more difficult to attract and retain judges of the 
highest caliber.
  I would also like to note my appreciation for the majority leader's 
efforts to address this issue. Although attempts to repeal section 140 
have stalled at this point, I know Senator Reid, along with Senator 
Leahy, are committed to ensuring that we maintain a strong judiciary 
and to enacting necessary reforms. I will continue to do everything I 
can to support these efforts.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The bill (S. 3711) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, 
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:

                                S. 3711

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THE FEDERAL 
                   JUDICIARY.

       Pursuant to section 140 of Public Law 97-92, justices and 
     judges of the United States are authorized during fiscal year 
     2009 to receive a salary adjustment in accordance with 
     section 461 of title 28, United States Code.

                          ____________________