As I'm writing this, I'm listening to Vermont Public Radio's Vermont Edition interviewing Chief Justice Paul Reiber and the Courts Administrator, Lee Susskin, about a $1million shortfall, about 3% of its annual expenditures. Susskin says they need $1.6 million more in FY08.
As I listen to it, I hear mostly whining and prattle intended to appeal to the Legislature and the Governor for additional funding. To her credit, Jane Lindholm, the interviewer is asking tough questions and getting somewhat pablum answers, but the whole interview seems designed as a lobbying effort by the courts. I wonder if VPR will offer the same opportunity to other agencies of state government?
It seems quite clear and simple to me. If the budget is not sufficient, then the court system must continue to tighten their belts like any other element of government. They have 16 vacant positions that need to be filled. If the Legislature determines that the courts need additional funding, they should find it within existing budget requests. We cannot simply add more funding for every agency and function of government beyond inflationary pressures.
Reiber is so circumspect about answering questions that he comes off as non-responsive. For example when asked if he has suggestions about how to streamline the Vermont system to perhaps save money, he says it's not his responsibility to do this. This is nonsense. He certainly has the prerogative to make recommendations for legislative action. Refusing to reveal them publicly gives the impression that he is evasive.
Yet, a call just now from the dean of the Vermont Law School, which almost seemed planted, about the notion of 'business courts' was answered by Chief Justice Reiber essentially saying he is making a recommendation to that effect and went on to describe it. I find the Chief Justice's performance inconsistent.
No comments:
Post a Comment