|
|
"A collaborative political resource." |
Supreme Court justices face angry voters in Pennsylvania
|
| Parent(s) |
Race
-
|
| Contributor | Chronicler |
| Last Edited | Chronicler Nov 07, 2005 07:31pm |
| Category | News |
| News Date | Nov 07, 2005 07:00pm |
| Description | Supreme Court justices face angry voters in Pennsylvania
11/7/2005, 5:16 p.m. ET
By PETER JACKSON
The Associated Press
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — For the two Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices up for re-election this year, the foe is public perception, not a candidate of the opposition party.
Justices Russell M. Nigro and Sandra Schultz Newman are fighting for new 10-year terms because of rising anger toward the court, stirred largely by a pay raise that state lawmakers gave themselves in the middle of the night last summer.
Critics of the high court say Pennsylvania's justices must be held accountable for condoning such legislative arrogance.
"There is a serious disconnect in Pennsylvania between our elected officials" and the people, said Russ Diamond, chairman of PACleanSweep, a political action committee committed to ousting every incumbent in the Legislature.
Citizen activists and radio talk-show hosts who have led the rebellion against the pay-raise law have been clamoring in recent days for "no" votes against Nigro and Newman in Tuesday's retention elections.
If either justice is denied a second term, it will be the first time in Pennsylvania history that a member of the Supreme Court has been ousted through the usually low-profile, yes-or-no voting process.
The Legislature approved the pay-raise bill at 2 a.m. July 7 without debate or public notice. The bill boosted lawmakers' pay by 16 percent to 54 percent, pushing the base legislative salary to $81,050 — higher than any other state but California.
Even more offensive to some people was the way most legislators began collecting their raises immediately in the form of payments known as "unvouchered expenses," in spite of a constitutional ban on lawmakers accepting raises during the term in which they are passed. The state Supreme Court upheld that maneuver 19 years ago...
As Election Day neared, both justices began airing campaign ads, with Nigro boasting in his TV spots th |
| Article | Read Article |
|
|
