S. 442 would provide for loan repayment for prosecutors and public defenders.
Detailed Summary
John R. Justice Prosecutors and Defenders Incentive Act of 2007 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to add a program for student loan repayment for prosecutors and public defenders.
Defines "prosecutor" and "public defenders" to include individuals engaged in the supervision, education, or training of other prosecutors and public defenders. Includes within the definition of "public defender" full-time employees of nonprofit organizations who devote substantially all their time providing indigent criminal defense services and federal public defenders. Requires prosecutors and public defenders to prosecute or provide representation for juvenile delinquency cases.
Directs the Attorney General to establish a program to assume the obligation to repay the student loans of any borrowers who are employed as prosecutors or public defenders and are not in default on their loans. Sets forth requirements for such program, including that: (1) the borrower will remain employed as a prosecutor or public defender for not less than three years; and (2) the borrower will repay to the Attorney General any repayment benefits received if the borrower is fired from employment for misconduct or voluntarily separates from employment.
Limits the amount payable under such program to $10,000 per year for any borrower and to an aggregate total of $60,000 for any borrower.
Authorizes the Attorney General to enter into subsequent agreements with a borrower for another three-year period or a lesser period.
Requires the Attorney General to give priority in granting repayment benefits to borrowers who have the least ability to repay their loans.
Authorizes the Attorney General to issue regulations to carry out this Act.
Directs the Government Accountability Office to study and report to Congress on the impact of law school accreditation requirements and other factors on law school costs and access, including the impact of such requirements on racial and ethnic minorities.
Authorizes appropriations.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 4/10/2007: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 113.
Points in Favor
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
George Derieg
This bill is a huge step in the right direction, and as a Deputy Public Defender I am thrilled that the government wants to help lawyers who have chosen the noble profession of public defense. But The average young lawyer has two student loans: public and private loans. It would help more if the bill provided assistance with private loans as well.
Perry Gold, j.D.
Step in wrong direction. Ex: Chicago: Pub. Atts.
paid av. $80K+ & > $ paid to private atts.. 100s of apps per
pub. job. while massive layoffs of pub. atts. & high unemployment.
$ should be spent on more pub. atts. not for already overpaid pub. attorn.
Mike Randolph
Can anybody please decipher what the heck Perry Gold is saying. I would love to respond if I could only figure out what he said!?!
PG. JD.
Bad bill; In urban areas ex: Chicago those benefiting receive above average salaries, while there are real problems of uemployment,layoffs of attorneys & shortage of $ to hire enough public lawyers, limit bill to farm towns
Mike Randolph
What exactly do you mean by above-average? Are you saying PDs in Chicago make more than the average attorney in Chicago or more than the average attorney in Illinois? Wouldn't the cost of living in Chicago require a higher salary for those in Chicago v. those in "farm towns?"
P.G.
Here PDs earn 50k to start
and 80 k on average, average salary for 2 person house in Chicago is 70 k, typical loan payment is 10k/year after deducting this average starting salry is $100k for pd couple
PG
Meanwhile, most private sector attorneys work in small firms which, typically pay 30k to 45K to start, but do not advance. Solo attorneys have "income potential"
but many are not netting as muck as pub. lawyers & cannot collect going billable rate, make deals ex: could charge only $200/closing
PG
The reason the bill is good when applied to smaller counties is that there public attorneys may only earn 35 to 40k, though cost of living less, student loan payment is the same as in cities
Mike Randolph
PG, I think your numbers are off.
Salary.com puts the Median salary for attorneys (Level I, btw) at $84k Microsoft's Small Business Center puts Chicago median salaries at 10.9% above the nation as a whole making Chicago Median attorney salaries more like $93k A starting salary of 50k puts the PDs 43k below counterparts. [Ed. note: URLs were omitted from this comment because they cause some browsers not to display the entire page.]
PG
The median salary for Chicago lawyers may be 94k, (but this includes the pay given to large lawfirm assoc, who according
to Challanger, Grey and Christmas, stay in large firms 2.5 years on average). PD's in Chicago earn 80k on average, this is no crisis, but shortage of pd.s is a crisis, here
KS
The bill may provide excessive benefits in some areas, such as the southwest (and apparently Chicago), where PD's and ADA's are paid well. However, for the most part, PD's and ADA's are underpaid considering the educational costs and meager salaries they receive. In the northeast, NYC ADA's earn anywhere in the mid to high $40 K range. Massachusetts pays about $38 K. Although I'm not entirely sure, PD's may earn less than ADA's in these markets. Given the increasing cost of higher education (average of about $100 K debt upon graduation) and the limited room for pay increases, this bill will allow many young ADA's and PD's to enjoy a long career in criminal law. Without the bill we risk having our DA and PD offices becoming a farm system / training ground for higher paying firms.
If this bill is passed it'll be interesting to see how some of the more high paying DA and PD offices will react (i.e., those with high salaries and/or already forgive loans).
JA
It comes down to this: in order to recruit and retain qualified candidates for the public sector, you need to either fund competitive salaries or find creative ways ease the clear tension that presses upon prosecutors in the 5 to 10 year phase of their careers. In this segment of the workforce, private attorneys begin accepting equity in partnerships; what can the public sector do to compete with that? They can't typically compete with private sector salaries, so that leaves, well, this.
Funding more PD's and ADA at a lower pay rate merely perpetuates the real problem, the lack of competence among the ranks. One good lawyer handling 100 cases is better than five bad ones handling 20.
SH
I am a public defender with well over $100,000 in public and private loans. I knew that becoming a PD would mean a lower salary, but I really want to make a difference and help people with zealous representation. However, I have gotten to the point where I can no longer continue wtih my low salary. I don't know where PG comes up with the average PD earns $80K...not in Maryland by any means. I'm struggling. I want to be a PD, but I just can't financially afford it. I live in a studio apartment and don't live an extravagent lifestyle. I just can't get by with my salary, pay my loans, and still manage to afford to go to the grocery store when I need to. I have a JD for goodness sake. Struggling financially has become too much of a stress for me. So, at least for a while, I'm heading to the private sector so that I can pay down some of the private loans at least. Hopefully I can return some day.
DL
I am a 96 law school grad. I took a 60% pay cut to become a DA 6 years ago. My student loans are still $84k, and even with minimizing costs at every turn, I will not pay off my student loans before retirement. My son has fallen ill this year and the medical bills (even with insurance) are stacking up. I am considering abandoning my career as a DA just to make ends meet. This bill is a huge step in the right direction for me.
MBM
SH is right on the mark. I am an asst state attorney in miami, and my salary ($40,000) pales in comparison to basically every person I went to school with. I don't know where PG got his numbers either- the starting salary for prosceutors in Cook County Ill (aka Chicago) is 43,200. $40-45,000 is pretty much standard in other big cities (NYC, Philly, Boston) as well. These are places where crime is serious problems, and prosecutors and defenders are in serious need, as opposed to farm towns, which also have a lower cost of living. I went to a public school and my loans (and those of my friends, at least) are all closer to $100,000- the current salaries for public sector attorneys in big cities simply do not cut it- this bill is basically a necessity.
PG
If our congress persons want to be sensible, they could limit the aid aid to those who earn the lower salaries, and/or where a shortage of professionals exists. This the criteria for student loan relief for other gov workers. Many attorneys, who earn well under $43,000.00 with experience who work for the private sector, legal aid, and non-pd asa jobs in government. There is no basis to treat P.D.s and asa's special.
pg
Some response: KS assumes firms pay higher, in Chicago, the asa jobs and asst. pd jobs pay higher(except for firms which exclude based on status to do corp. stuff, not clinical work which many attorneys went to law school for and the average stay at these firms is two years--while a person can make a career at the pd's and state's attorneys office)
PG
JA--Very few attorneys become equity partners. To even be an associate at such a firm, one has to have country club connections/bc these firms hire based on status, not substance. Like the vast majority of attorneys, asas and asst. pds cannot get jobs at high priced firms, b/c they don't have the status even though substantively many are outstanding attorneys. The salaries in many metro areas are already greater than those in the public sector (exclusive firms aside) JA doesn't understand the attorney shortage problem. Often there is 300 cases per attorney at the pd, and clients don't always cooperate. Attorneys are stressed. So its better to have enough well paid attorneys then an insufficient amount who are over paid. If keeping up with the Jones' is more important to a lawyer than public service, let him or her try to get a job at an exclusive firm.
pG
Sh--Congrats on finding a job in the private sector that pays the bills. My most recent jobs have been in the private sector. I live in a small one bedroom apartment. While my building is not section 8, other apartments in my complex are. My point is that the asa asst. pd criteria used by the bill is a distiction without merit. Many private sector attorneys who care about public service such as you and I, make very little. At the same time there are asst. pds and asas who make well over $100,000.00. And at least a small minority of these people have no commitment to public service.
PG
DL--But why should folks be treated special reagardless of income. Why not have it so only those receiving low income receive the benefit? Why does an attorney earning $80k or more need gov. aid. Note: you probably have health ins., you are probaly subject to family leave--these benefits are often not available in the public sector. I also do not understand what you mean by "pay cut". If an attorney has the status, he or she could earn a ton of money at a large firm. But these attorney often work 80 hours or more a week, and typically burn out after two years. There is no pay cut when one leaves such a firm, bc big firm pay is short lived, and based on status, not on merit and contributions to society.
PG JD
JA suggests incompetant attorneys are hired by gov. offices & by competing with the large firms in $ could gov. retain competent attorneys. Untrue! Many excellent attorneys have nothing to do with big firms, ex: Johny Cochran, Clarence Darrow, & tons of others. Comparing big firm attorneys w/clinical attorneys in gov., legal aid and small firms, is comparing apples & oranges. Many big firm lawyers don't develop skills necessary to work w/clients and work in the courtroom. Most other lawyers don't have the country club connections to obtain employment at large firms, &/or don't want to work at a place where the quality of their abilities doens't matter with respect to hiring. There is a problem with retaining experienced attorneys, in some place. In many meto areas, asst. public defender and assistant state's attorney jobs are already in high demand by experienced attorneys as well as qualified new attorneys. There is no reason for the bill to cover such places.
PG JD
MBM -Received average income info from reports from gov. agencies. Note: Cook County ASA's are set to receive a pay raise which I support, and the starting salary figures I use reflect this. Note also that in most professions starting salaries tend to be low. The problem is that in some places,and this may include some metro areas, there are no significant raises to that in the rurual midwest an attorney defending a murder case can earn only $35k. I agree that this is unacceptable and must be remedied. I agree that cost of a legal education relative to the typical salary is too high--but this effects most of us regardles of whether we work at a small firm, gov. or legal aid. There are many assistant public defenders and asa's who earn well over $100,000.00--they are not struggeling, and have not made any tough choices re: making ends meet. Instead of the bill as is, Congress must use income as a factor for student loan relief as they do with other professionals.
Pg JD
Hopefully, a final thought. At least among the folks here, except JA, no one is saying that higher paid gov. attorney should receive the $60k break. According the Buruea of Labor Statistics, local gov. and state attorneys receive average (when looking nationwide) about $80k--this is in line with the Cook County figures. Clearly, there are a significant amount of high paid attorneys who would be receiving the benefit. This is the gist of my "beef" with the bill. The only folks who seem to disagree are those who opine, as J.A. seems to, that the salaries should be competitive with the big firm attorneys---if the big firm attorneys are overpaid, we must overpay the asst, public defenders and asa's too, otherwise they will leave in droves for the big firm salary--so the opinion goes. Where are the facts for this argument?
GD
After being in court all day long handling well over 130 cases I am exhausted. I have read all of these responses and am saddened by the fact that this is even an issue.
GD
PG thinks there should be a salary cap because in order to compete with "big firms" we should pay PD's and DA's more money. But most counties can't afford the pay increase. I believe this money will be coming from the federal government at a whopping cost of 75 cents per family household per year. What a terrible price this country's households should pay to make sure their competent District Attorneys and Public Defenders not sell out and go private. The salary cap is idiotic. I make well over 80k and half of my monthly income goes to student loans.
GD
That means I really make 40k, after taxes I am below the poverty line in the area of California I live in. I think our households can afford to pay 75 cents a year for 60k in loan forgiveness. That is the price of a candy bar or a soda out of a vending machine. Now I have to get back to work and probably work until 7 or 8pm because I want to zealously defend ALL of my clients even though I am salaried to work 8-5pm.
Mike Randolph
I say, just pass the damn bill already! Once that is done let DOJ (who, if memory serves me correctly, is who will administer the money) figure how to allocate it!
PG
GD Your loan payments are about 4 times above the averagean yearly payment. The gov. must not pass laws based on the exceptional case, and imprudent borrowing, when it is well known that salaries will not cover a loan as high as yours. Why should the rest of us pay for your lack of forsight. MR--Doj will not have j discretion not to give the aid to well paid attorneys and give the aid to other lawyers who are less fortunate. Welfare for the wealthy is a waste no mater what the cost--the gov. does not pay to fix bridges--so people die. The gov. does not use resources for healthcare reform-so people die. The gov. does little to help other professionals with loans--peole struggle. Yet there is $ for higher paid attorneys like GD-why because they were grossly negligent in the borrowing-this makes no sense. The bill will cost $25 million a year. This money could be put to better use with respect to hands outs to people like GD.
Mike Randolph
PG: Where do you get your information about DOJ not having the discretion to limit the payments? I have read through the statute and it is moot on this point. It seems to me that some sort of means testing would be within their power to impose since the legislation doesn't address the issue. BTW, I don't disagree with your position. However, if the money is offered I am not going to turn it down either.
PG
Out of my ass.
PG jd
The last comment is by the not by me. (the other pgs are) If you can't be serious or have to cuss don't post anything. A straight forward reading of the bill is that DOJ would have the power to administer the distribution of $ according to the bill, not to limit or expand the classes of people who would receive the benefit.
Maynard Saxby
PG doesn't understand how bills are passed. Most bills start out with the intention of funding critical projects to benefit the public generally. But many politicians count on interest groups for support--so funding for narrow interests, not necessarily in the general public's interests, gets tacked on--this is called "pork". PG must realize that his comments won't change a thing. A key person behind the bill is Dick Durbin, a well known
"pork" spender from Illinois. PG will have the chance to vote against him, but likely the Republican candidate will also be a "pork" spender and the third party in Illinois is not strong--yet.
Jay Korn
I think that Pg was saying that the argument for including higher paid attorneys is that public attorney salary must compete with the big firms--not supporting this agrument. He seems to feel that it's o.k. that public attorneys make less than attorneys in some higher paying firms, but aid is needed where they are making far less than attorneys generally make as attorneys in the private sector, or working at Starbucks because of the high rate of unemployment. It seems that people are confusing entry pay at a particular government employer with pay for advanced employees. I'm a doctor. I earned poop while a resident. I don't earn poop now. I expect that in most cases the public defender's and state's attorneys work the same way. Entry level you get poop. You work for a few years, you get more and can stay with your employer. That's what I did. I did not get instantly gratified. Why should attorneys.
Jay Korn
I might add that I could get paid more if I changed my specialty.
Anestheiolgy-that's where the money is, but that's not my schtick. I like what I do, and that's what matters to me. Should it matter that another doctor makes more when I am making a decent living. Do I ask the government for assistance because some other doctor makes more than I?
CMF
The "salary cap" is not something new, see the recent College Cost Reduction Act--(which changes a prior bill, its essentially not new) where firefighters only receive their aid if they make less that $65,000.00.
Assist Pros, Cleveland
I am a new Assistant Prosecutor for Cuyahoga County, the one in which Cleveland resides. It is one of the largest counties in the nation, yet, my starting salary is 44k per year and that starting salary was above what some of my colleagues came in at.
With my loan payment each month of over 1100 (500 for fed money, 600 private) I can barely make ends meet - food + rent. All of this comes with working 70 hour work weeks.
I am not sure how this is a bad bill, especially when we provide similar relief for Doctors and Teachers who provide service to the community.
BW
Didn't the Senate already vote and pass this legislation?http://pdstuff.apublicdefender.com/2007/07/27/loan-forgiveness-...
George Derieg
The last time I checked this website was a few months ago, I'm surprised that there are so many comments today. I'll just say this bill is a great idea and it should be seen not as an end but a beginning. The government should help out new professionals with soaring student loans in more than just prosecution and public defense work. When I said this bill was a step in the right direction in the beginning I think it will pave the way for more legislation that will benefit new professionals in all walks of life.
PG
Asst Pros is loan is extraordinarily high. The size of his/her loan is not dependant on whether he works in the private sector or public sector, and salaries are often higher in goverment, especially if you look at long term career employment, and consider that firms which hire bases on substance rather that status are constitute the majority, and these jobs are often low paying-especially to start. Asst. Pros-recognized that 44K is only his starting salary, apparently he will be paid closer to the $80k average if he stays at his position. I read CMF's comment and looked at the College Cost reduction act. Similar relief for other professions is given where there is a shortage of professionals, and/or the professionals are earning bellow a certain amount.
Davis Angelo
The bill will help many attorneys who need the aid, and guard against
and underpaid attorney defending in serioius cases; however, especially if this bill is only a step and other professionals will be considered later, shouldn't congress ironout the kinks this bill first--such as giving a $60,000.00 benefit to attorneys earning over $80,000.00
Joe Bagadonis
Asst. Pros Cleveland's case is troubling. How is it permitted that a young law student borrow so much. Shouldn't the government regulate the student loans better to prohibit banks and expensive law schools from taking advantage of naive law students.
Maynard Saxby
BW is right. Instead of seeking to have the bill passed on its own, the Senate leaders opted to include the bill with the Higher Education Act which was approved. This meathod is sneaky and helps get pork through, (but it also streamlines Senate procedure and saves taxpayer money that way.)
There was more debate here than in the Senate. People should realize that the bill is very small by Federal Standards. Very few politicians care about $25 million spending and $.75 adds up very quickly, the last one may have been the Democrat Paul Tsongas who tragically died too soon. Few pol's realize that creating
special status often has unintended bad results. Maybe George "in his wisdom" will veto the bill, so a more reasoned bill to help public defenders could be passed.
PG
BW--Congrats on your anticipated aid. Maybe you use some of the savings to buy me a beer and we can debate further.
Jack Ryan Toomey
Looks like this bill is going to be law soon. Interesting tidbit--The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin reports in its lead September 14, 2007 story that small firm attorneys earn on average $68,000.00--so there is already some dispartiy between public and private sector wages, with most private sector attorneys earning far less than public sector attorneys--this bill then only would widen the gap.
Dave
It is interesting that according to Dick Durbin's website, only 60 percent of all public defenders and states attorneys feel there is a need for this bill. This is curious because the public defenders and state's attorneys would only have a bias for this bill.
Heads up
Maynard Saxby has it wrong. The National Republicans have decided not put much funding in the 2008 race against Durbin. If your from Illinois, against this bill and Dick Durbin's approach to student loan reform, and want to Dump Durbin in 2008 the best way may be to vote against Durbin in the Democratic primary.
assistant pros ohio
this bill would be a life saver for me. Federal Prosecutors already have this perk, and our Senator Voinovich has intro'd a bill that would make this perk for Federal Prosecutors not be counted as 'taxable' income. what really needs to happen folks, is major reforms for student lending. Sallie Mae is way out of control...student loans are virtually never dischargable in bankruptcy, and collectors are not bound by the same rules as other lenders.
Michael A. Caves
I fully support this bill, and the claim that small private firms need this aid more than prosecutors/PD’s is absurd. Private firms participate in a market; if new lawyers are not satisfied with their small firm pay, they can go to another firm, or go solo. There is no comparable market for government work; you can’t be a “solo” prosecutor/PD, and there usually are not competing prosecutor’s offices within the same jurisdiction. Private firms are profit-driven, and if a private firm isn’t paying you what you are worth, you switch to a private firm that can pay you what you need. In contrast, lawyers committed to government service as DA’s/PD’s but who need more money, can switch counties (but they will likely face the same problem) or go private. Meanwhile, the public suffers.
Michael A. Caves
There is intrinsic value in having competent DA’s/PD’s, and we must pay them accordingly. What is the value to the general public in having one more private law firm? Whatever the value, certainly it isn’t so great that government funds should go to private firms instead of government prosecutors/defenders. If a firm cannot pay you what you need, that firm is failing and the market can deal with it. If a firm can (but won’t) pay you what you need, why should the government subsidize that business practice?
Government attorneys do not bill by the hour the way that private firms do. It takes legislative action for us to get a pay raise. We can’t just charge our clients more or change our business plan. Private firms should not be given federal aid just because they can’t compete. These are businesses; let the market deal with it.
Finally, if the pay at these private firms is so low, leave! Come work for the government, since we are paid so well already!
tpb
Has anyone heard the latest status of the bill? The last I heard was May 16, 2007: Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 149. With every passing month, it looks less likely this will pass. I am an ADA in Alabama and an heard a rumor that it would not be reached. Personally, I have been with the DA's office six years and make 49k a year. My student loans are over $800 a month. I've been unable to afford buying a home and drive the same car from college barely able to afford repairs. My wife, kids and I had to make it through all last week with $20 in the bank account until payday. I love my job and this bill gave me hope that I would be able to remain. Does someone have any new information on the status of the bill?
Mike Randolph
It passed in the house on 5-15-07. Check out the following link:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-916
It was attached as an Amendment to S. 1642 (The Higher Education Amendments of 2007) and was passed on 7-24-07. Check out the following two links for that:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-1642
and
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/amendment.xpd?session=110&amdt=s2377
The whole legislative process give me somewhat of a headache but I think this means that it has passed and needs only to be funded. Of course, I could be wrong.
John Connelly
I think the point is that assistant public defenders and states attorneys already earn on average $10,000.00 per year more than attorneys in the private sector. The loan problem is not unique to these higher paid attorneys. Meanwhile, there a people who legitamately need government aid. I think either the bill has not been signed by GWB yet, or it has just been signed as part of an umnibus Christmas spending package where GWB gets his pork war dollars and congress gets its pork spending all at the expense of the general public.
Pete Vohrst
The problem with this bill is that unlike similar bills for teachers, firefighters, and attorneys who are not asas and assitant pds is that there is no needs requirement in this bill. There are many people in all profession who are in similar situation as TPD above who will not receive any aid, while many asa's and assitatn pd's earn high salaries relative both to the rest of America and to the legal profession and will receive the extra $60k. If the politicians cared to be senible they would craft a bill to benefit folks based on need. Its seems that a terrible precedent is now set
and aid is based on lobby efforts alone.
Mike Randolph
Pete, Is there any reason DOJ, who is administering the money if I remember correctly, couldn't implement needs testing? I had always assumed that is what they would do since $25 million at $10k per person would only cover 2,500 attorneys.
Ted Watson
If this bill is not pre election special interest spending, I don't understand the reason behind this bill. Why are all public defenders and state's attorneys, with their $80,000 average salary, which is about double what the average American earns, and a greater average salary than the typical career private attorney, being given a $10,000.00 break. It seems this bill could only damage the public interest by adding to the deficit without any public benefit. What ever happened to ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. This bill reaks of trickel down economics which doesn't work.
Mike Randolph
Ted, could you please tell us where you get your figures from? I don't know whether they are right or wrong for the country as a whole but I do know the average PD salary in Georgia is nowhere near $80,000.
Ted Watson
Check the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. There is a $40,000 gap between the average salary for assistant public defenders and assistant tate's attorneys, and the lowest paid assistant state's attorneys and assistant public defenders. There is no doubt that in Alabama and Georgia the average salary for these attorneys is not close the average nationwide salary.
My question is why include the relatively higher paid attorneys with the lower paid attorneys when providing Federal aid? It does not help the lower paid folks to give a higher paid attorneys the break as well, and could hurt the goal of encouraging attorneys to practice in areas where attorneys have not been paid so much (because the pay gap remains the same since the $10,000 yearly break applies everywhere). And--in regions where public defenders and state's attorneys are alread well paid, i only encourages people who have no care or concern about public service to obtain or keep these jobs.
Jill Ziegler
According to "Steve" who posted a commnet on the Washington Watch
page regarding the college cost reduction act, there is a cap of
$65,000.00. Can anyone verify this.
AC
Being a second year law student who will have over 85 grand in loans upon graduation, the passing of this bill will be critical to my decision to go into the public sector. If it passes I would love to take a job as a prosecutor, if it doesn't pass I honestly don't see myself taking the job as the starting salary in Georgia will be less than $40,000. The passage of this bill will allow less privileged law students to consider entering the public sector. I just don't think it's fair to see so many young lawyers struggle to make ends meet while working for the government. Speaking from first hand experience, the majority of students who consider taking jobs in the public sector are those on scholarship or those who have someone else paying for law school and this just shouldn't be the case.
Mike Randolph
Jill, There is a link to the bill at the top of this page: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_442.html#30864
I think the cap is $10,000 per year with a total cap of $60,000
JH
With two working adults (prosecutor and teacher) in NJ we are barely making it. The bill is a MUST.
Roy Cole
As a public defender who makes less than $36,000 per year I applaud this, our director makes about $80,000.00 per year but he has been doing this for thirty years. We work thirty hours per week for them and then have to work another 30 hours per week to pay the bills. Chicago is the exception, not the rule for most of us, I have to cover my own health insurance and have NO retirement, a little relief in paying my student loans, exceeding $90,000.00 even after 9 years in practice.
Furrygoat
Are you guys serious with this 80K a year average nonsense???? IN NYC, arguably the busiest area in the nation for crime, the ADA's and Public Defenders do not start anywhere near 80K, nor do most ADAS or Public defenders ever see 80K as their salary. They hardly ever get raises. They start at 50K, and usually hover in that area for 3 or more years. Compare that to working at a firm in NYC where the starting salary could be as high as 165K. Gimme a break. They are by far the lowest paid lawyers in town. This bill helps a lot.