View Full Document

Replies and Response



View the full content.
View Full Document
View Full Document

5 views

Unformatted text preview:

REPLIES RESPONSE TO SCOTT BAKER SHOULD WE PAY FEDERAL CIRCUIT JUDGES MORE 88 B U L REV 63 2008 PERHAPS WE SHOULD PAY FEDERAL CIRCUIT JUDGES MORE FRANK B CROSS Scott Baker s article takes a creative approach to the question of whether the federal judiciary should receive a pay raise and concludes that the data counsel otherwise 1 While I am a great advocate of empirical analysis to inform questions such as this and Professor Baker may have done the best job possible with the available measures I fear that this study contributes little to the debate and cannot support its author s conclusions The available tools to measure the effects of lower pay and judicial performance are so extremely crude they cannot tell us much Perhaps more significant Baker s failure to prove that judicial pay does matter given the limitations of the available measures provides no evidence that it does not matter I think it makes far more sense given the lack of reliable measures to rely on basic economic intuition and more direct anecdotal experience I WAGE ECONOMICS AND JUDGES In ordinary economic circumstances better pay obviously results in higher quality workers Professor Baker notes some of this research in his article 2 Basic economic intuition tells us that an employer offering less money for a job will get fewer and less qualified applicants than an employer offering more The best candidates won t even want the job which will be filled by someone of lesser qualifications Herbert D Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law McCombs School of Business University of Texas at Austin Professor of Law University of Texas Law School Professor of Government University of Texas at Austin The author would like to thank his colleagues Dain Donelson and Robert Prentice for their helpful insights into this response 1 Scott Baker Should We Pay Federal Circuit Judges More 88 B U L REV 63 66 2008 2 Id at 73 n 42 815 816 BOSTON UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW Vol 88 815 This line of thinking is behind



Access the best Study Guides, Lecture Notes and Practice Exams

Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Replies and Response and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Replies and Response and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?