Job Security for Judges and Tenured Proffessors!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bonnie, Feb 16, 2005.

  1. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    Job security
    Gary Aldrich


    February 15, 2005


    The recent flap about tenured University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill, the wacky white man pretending to be of American Indian heritage, may not seem to have much in common with federal employees or federal judges. Upon closer examination, we see that all three suffer from the same mindset: Arrogance and insolence as a result of a failed system of lifetime tenure, a system that also guarantees plush retirement benefits.

    Tenure ensures that professors can never be fired for incompetence, and the retirement benefits ensure that only a few will leave the profession on their own. Not coincidentally, the good professors are the ones who leave. It is past time to rethink our old-fashioned belief that granting these excessive privileges and benefits to classes of citizens somehow ensures a desirable outcome.

    In the judiciary, it has been well established that federal judges appointed for life fail to ensure fairness or equity for all citizens. Instead, politicians controlling the White House have gamed the system while the Senate eagerly confirms more activist judges.

    Thus, Americans have suffered decades of nutty decisions from the Supreme Court. At the present time our precious American values are on the line, as arrogant judges decide for the rest of us how we should live our lives. Now they purport to tell us how we can worship our God even though the Constitution clearly forbids their meddling.

    Who are these people holding lifetime appointments? More important, who do they think they are? They are a privileged class that answers to nobody. Moreover, they are quite confident that they can’t be removed from their powerful positions. If one were to be found guilty of a significant felony, he might be removable; but short of a very public outing of a serious violation of law, it seems their jobs are safe.

    Whatever good our country was supposed to get out of lifetime appointments of judges, I submit that the negative consequences have outweighed the positive ones, and there is no justification for continuing this failed experiment.

    This system of lifetime tenure has not worked out well for academia, either. The complaints are rising to a crescendo as more students courageously blow the whistle on their professors--professors like Ward Churchill. For example, in a recent meeting with several hundred students of Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, I made an allegation that too many tenured professors proudly declare themselves “Communists” while pushing hard-left agendas on students. They've made it clear that conservative and Christian views are unwelcome in their classrooms. I said that students were being blackmailed into silence by professors who hold grade point averages over their heads as punishment for expressing a conflicting ideology.

    I also stated that our students are being brainwashed, while parents are being forced to pay large sums of money for the privilege of watching professors play with their children’s young minds.

    Two professors who had infiltrated the meeting rose in protest. Red-faced, they declared me to be a liar and demanded that I prove my “outrageous” allegations. A young lady in the front row of the packed auditorium bravely raised her hand. First timidly, then with increasing firmness, she spoke of several of her Lehigh professors who had expressed hatred for American values and fondness for the likes of Fidel Castro. Following her lead, other students rose to give similar testimony. The angry and now “outed” professors quickly made their exit.

    Back in Washington, D.C., more than 2 million federal employees report to a federal "shrine" each day with the knowledge that unless they fail to show up, or are convicted of a serious crime, they will have a job for life. They also know that when they retire, they will enjoy remarkable benefits far in excess of the paltry Social Security benefits being constantly debated today. These privileged retired federal employees will also have the best healthcare benefits – the same benefits as their chief protectors and benefactors up on Capitol Hill.

    As in the cases of the federal judges and tenured professors, the guaranteed paycheck a federal employee enjoys reinforces nothing in him but insolence and arrogance without accountability. It also breeds stagnation and mediocrity, because most feds cannot leave and collect benefits until they reach the age of retirement - currently 62.

    Even if a fed is weary of his job and yearns to try a second career, he finds it hard to walk away from the security of guaranteed employment and golden benefits.

    Many years ago, smart people who ran the military decided that soldiers should retire early unless they excelled in management. This culling process was nicknamed “Up or Out” and continues today. When a member of the armed services has his “20 years in,” he can move into the private sector and still enjoy decent military retirement benefits.

    The military is well off, ensuring openings from top to bottom so new recruits can come in. The entire system is kept young and energetic – exactly what is healthiest for the military. Private sector employers are also well off, enjoying a constant pool of experienced, mature individuals who fit well into key positions.

    Why don’t we want the same environment in our courtrooms, our educational institutions, and our civilian federal government? Is it a good thing to retain federal judges who are so confused by age that they cannot even tie their own shoelaces?

    It’s time for the “Up or Out” concept to be implemented in our other important institutions. Let’s get rid of the old-fashioned concept that all are equal, but that some are more equal than others. We’re denying thousands of our sharp, well-educated college graduates important employment opportunities because there are not enough job vacancies. This seems stupid.

    It can’t be overemphasized that conservatives are at a disadvantage in efforts to return our culture to a balance because we refuse to use the tactics of the Hard Left. We play by the rules. Meanwhile the opposition runs around flattening our tires with ice picks. It’s no wonder the conservative bus never seems to leave the station. At this unique time in our political history when we have the power for but a brief time, won’t we make some much-needed changes that benefit us?


    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/garyaldrich/printga20050215.shtml
     
  2. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    This one hits on a topic in which I am keenly interested. The abuses of federal judges are the stuff of legend. The federal judiciary is out of control and is grabbing more and more power for itself while the executive and legislative branches are left scratching their heads.

    My preference would be to amend the constitution to require that all judges be elected. I would limit them to a single eight year term in any post at any level. So a fed district judge could get elected to the circuit appellate court when his term was up. When that term expired, he could run for the SCOTUS. That would assure that a judge was in his job long enough to perform effectively and by allowing them to run for higher level offices, those who did a good job, could be "rehired" by the voters. Those who abused their offices or simply did not do a very good job would be out of our hair after eight years.
     
  3. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    You may be interested in the new book entitled "Men In Black" by Mark Levin which addresses the abuses going on form the bench. I just got a copy.
     
  4. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    The whole point of appointing federal judges to life-time terms is so that they will be able to remain free of political entanglements and favoritism. A better solution would be to select judges on the basis of their legal accumen rather than their ideological bent. Give the screening committee the anonymous curriculum vitaes of the available nominees in a pool, and select them from that pool based upon the qulity of their decisions and how well those decisions stand further judicial review, i.e. in whether they are overturned on appeal with any regularity. Thos whose decisions are overturned with regularity are then culled from the pool. The names of the appointees would then be revealed at the time of their nomination. We would have a better quality judiciary as a result.
     

Share This Page