A district judge friend of mine says there is a bill headed to the Senate which rerduces the salaries of judges and DAs. A committee hearing is set for Thursday. Does anyone know about this?

The bill to which Mark's judge friend referred is HB 3306 by Rep. Berman/Sen. Duncan, set in Senate Finance on Thursday. The TDCAA Board of Directors has been aware of this bill from Day 1.

HB 3306 does NOT reduce judicial and DA salaries. It does, however, allow the Legislature to go below the statutory minimum salary for district judges and DAs if they need to make more cuts in order to balance the budget.

The good news is that Sen. Duncan & Co. on the Budget Conference Committee have fully funded DA salaries as of today. The bad news is that if some catastrophe -- meaning something worse than the current budget catastrophe (!) -- strikes the state between now and June 2nd, passage of HB 3306 will allow them to cut DA salaries if necessary to balance the budget. Note also that the Legislature is passing bills like HB 3306 for every state agency or entity that receives state money, so they're not picking on you.

Bottom line? This bill and its companions ARE going to pass into law, and we'll just have to deal with it.

If this bill passes, it will be a shame and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the "law of unintended consequences" comes into play.

Apart from the obvious concerns over how it could impact "our office," I think there is a broader policy interest at stake. As many of you know, we are already at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to attracting and keeping experienced prosecutors and judges in the public sector. Frankly, it is offensive that many recent law school graduates are achieving salaries that approach that of an elected district judge or district attorney.

Historically, I think the Legislature realized the importance of these elected offices and chose to guarantee their salaries, and supplemental office funds, by codifying same. Now, this bill sets an unfortunate precedent by saying that, in this instance, the law may not mean what it says. In other words, even though the law provides judges and prosecutors are guaranteed X amount, we can't rely on that any more because there may not be enough state revenue, and the statutory funding is subject to fluctuation every two years depending upon the state of the economy. Many will say that it works the same way in the private sector. Perhaps. The problem with that reasoning is that there is no limit on what one can make in the private sector so there is a risk/benefit balance that comes into play. Is HB 3306 going to provide an increase in judicial or prosecution salaries and funding if there's a budget SURPLUS??? Hell no!! My representative told me not to worry about these salaries going down as long as legisative retirement is tied to judicial salaries. Fine. Forgive me if I'm still a little uncomfortable knowing that judges and prosecutors are essential to the criminal justice system, are already underpaid, and now are going to be at the mercy of the folks in Austin every two years. The camel is about to have his nose under the tent!!!

Shannon, last I heard on this subject the judicial bill was the only one that had actually been set for passage even though there are others filed that cover other state funding. Is this still the case, or does your post indicate that the legislature is passing all such bills?

All the House bills were passed and are now in the Senate, and they're all being heard at the same time in Senate Finance on Thursday.

Lee, I'm certainly not an expert on the legislature, but seems obvious to me the legislature is openly hostile to law enforcement, the criminal justice system, and those of us that work therein. Perhaps the legislature is mirroring a prevalent attitude in our "me first" society..."you can't tell me what to do; I'll do what I want, I don't care what the law says." Juries in our county are spring-loaded to acquit, whether felony or misdemeanor.

Mike: I'd disagree about openly hostile. they aren't that at all this session. I think it is just that law enforcement is not a big priority this time...this time it is all about the money, or lack thereof. it ain't personal, but everyone in government is taking some financial hits, and we aren't immune.

I will say this, though. We have taken a beating by the ACLU and others the last Session and this Session, and we are going to have to do a better job of standing up for ourselves. I think our image is indeed being diminished by the constant attacks on death penalty, Tulia, etc....

It's all cyclical. Folks feel safe right now, crime rates are down, until recently parole rates were down, and the atmosphere is ripe for legislative indifference to the criminal justice system and overt or covert hostility toward the death penalty, crime labs, task forces, etc. HOWEVER, when our prison system becomes a revolving door again (which it will) like it was in the 80's, and another Kenneth McDuff gets out and goes on the rampage, then the folks in Austin are going to have "some splainin' to do!" This budget problem is causing them to play Russian Roulette with public safety, I'm afraid--and I'm not just worried because my salary is paid by the taxpayers.

On a more positive note-- and regarding the protection of prosecutors' interests before the Legislature, as well as keeping us informed-- Rob, Shannon, Jaime, and the rest of the folks at TDCAA are doing the best job yet that I've seen in my tenure as a prosecutor. Keep up the good work guys!

Lee is right about the work done by TDCAA. You really can't know what they do unless you come to Austin for a day and follow them around. There are many opportunities in a day when they take the time to explain something to an aide, state rep, or senator. Over time, it makes a big difference.

There is a cyclical history to this stuff, but even throughout that period, there is a very strong respect for prosecutors and the work they do.