Interesting Take on Retired Judges

This is from a Prop. 77 debate, courtesy of the SF Chronicle's Special Election Blog,

Dan Lowenstein is a professor at the UCLA School of Law, but he's probably not going to be getting many invitations to speak to retired judges anytime soon.

In a debate Thursday with Ted Costa, the man behind the Prop. 77 redistricting measure, Lowenstein suggested to a classroom of public administration students at the University of San Francisco that the only retired judges willing to serve on a redistricting panel will be those so inept that they can't find other work or so venal they'll be in it for the bribes.

Why would any retired judge volunteer for something "as onerous, arcane and incredibly boring" as the redistricting panel provided by Prop. 77, especially when it pays so little, Lowenstein asked.

As the students and their teacher, former Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy, looked on, Lowenstein then suggested that only three types of retired judges would be interested in that type of public service.

First, there are the judges "so incompetent they can't get a job with a law firm or as a private judge," he said. Then there are those "who have an ax to grind" and will use the panel and the redistricting power for their own partisan purposes. Finally, there are those who believe that there will be "something in it for him," judges who will be willing to sell their vote to whoever makes the best offer.

Of course, hyperbole isn't limited to one side of any political argument. Costa likened Prop. 77 to the women's suffrage movement in the way it will sweep the country and change the face of the nation if it passes on Nov. 8.