Kentucky

Although Tip O'Neill may have said something like "all politics are local", I do not recall anyone saying all politics are personal. 

The following story claiming, in effect, that partisan political bickering, personal dislike, and legislative extortion may be the motives behind  Senator David Williams' objections to extending the senior status judges program seem to be stretching incredulity a bit too far.

Serious concerns have been raised by too many lawyers and citizens that the senior status program is financially unsound and constitutionally questionable. 

It is undisputed that the program has not been reviewed closely to set up objective numerical limits, standard qualifications and eligibility, and other controls for its administration.  The proposed bill is a  start, but not a complete start and reminds me of the commercial involving an engineer sticking a piece of chewing gum to stop the leak at the dam.

To distract the financial issues and needs of this program by claims of personal animosity are a disservice to the Senator and to the Chief Justice.  Senator Williams has questions about the finances.  With people losing their jobs and their pensions, wouldn't you want your legislature to be a good steward of the public funds?

We have remarked on this program and the need to look at it closely too many times in the past to do it again. If you care, here's a link to the "googled" posts at this blog.  Click here.

Two hard hitting stories by Brandon Ortiz with the Herald Leader looked at the dollars and cents of the program and the oversight authority of the AOC.  Both stories were found at the Pol Watchers Blog.

• Herald-Leader: Ortiz - financial costs
• Herald-Leader: Ortiz - oversight on

In any event, here's the story:

Williams defends opposition to senior judges program

They are fellow Republicans and live about an hour apart in south-central Kentucky, but Senate President David Williams and Chief Justice Joseph Lambert are hardly friends.

"The truth is, I don't like him," said Williams, D-Burkesville.

But the Senate leader insists that is not the reason he opposes the state's senior judge program, under which judges get sweetened retirement benefits if they agree to work part time for five years after officially hanging up their robes.

Stan Billingsley, a retired judge who writes a legal blog, wrote last week that Williams intends to kill a bill that would extend the program, which expires next January. In doing so, Billingsley said, Williams is trying to force Lambert to either retire while he can still become a senior judge, or give up the promise of about $40,000 a year in additional retirement pay for the rest of his life.

"That would be hard for any judge to turn do down," wrote Billingsley, the senior editor of LawReader.com and a district and circuit judge in Carroll and Boone counties for 19 years. He cited "highly placed sources" but in an interview, would not identify them.

But Williams insisted in an interview last week that while he and Lambert have a "long history" of friction, he is not exacting retribution on him or the senior judge program because of that.

He said there are plenty of reasons to oppose the program -- the most generous for any state employees -- under which judges can retire with 100 percent of their pay after 20 years on the bench, along with an average of about $30,000 a year for life in additional benefits for serving as a special judge. (click on heading for rest of story by Andrew Wolfson in the Courier Journal).