Interviews and newly unearthed documents reveal that Thomas, facing financial strain, privately pushed for a higher salary and to allow Supreme Court justices to take speaking fees.
After almost a decade on the court, Thomas had grown frustrated with his financial situation, according to friends. He had recently started raising his young grandnephew, and Thomas’ wife was soliciting advice on how to handle the new expenses. The month before, the justice had borrowed $267,000 from a friend to buy a high-end RV.
At the resort, Thomas gave a speech at an off-the-record conservative conference. He found himself seated next to a Republican member of Congress on the flight home. The two men talked, and the lawmaker left the conversation worried that Thomas might resign.
Congress should give Supreme Court justices a pay raise, Thomas told him. If lawmakers didn’t act, “one or more justices will leave soon” — maybe in the next year.
At the time, Thomas’ salary was $173,600, equivalent to over $300,000 today. But he was one of the least wealthy members of the court, and on multiple occasions in that period, he pushed for ways to make more money. In other private conversations, Thomas repeatedly talked about removing a ban on justices giving paid speeches.
It seems like at the time maybe he expected to have to repay it but under very generous loan terms. But, once he started complaining about money and threatening to quit, somehow the loan was forgiven.
One of the consequences of hanging out with billionaires is that it makes one feel puny.
In an documentary about super rich kids, Ivanka Trump (a teenager at the time) said it was impossible to maintain friendships with people of modest means because you either had to exclude them from extravagant social events or pay their way. This leaves the poorer party feeling left out or awkwardly obligated.
It's likely that Thomas resents his benefactors. It's deeply ironic that Thomas apparently spends so much time in situations where he's the subordinate.
If that's how she said it, it's indicative of a morally bankrupt family. Not going to extravagant social events is not an option. How foul to raise a child to believe that. Just don't go to them, and then you can hang out and be friends with normal people without imposing your wealth on them.
I had a boss back in the '90s who used to be a corporate headhunter in San Francisco and then moved back to the east coast and bought a temp agency. He hired me to do computer stuff for his dalliance into futures trading so I had access to his finances; he had investment accounts of around $5 million, a 50' sailboat, a couple BMWs and the temp agency which earned him around $25K per month, so he was rich by almost anybody's standards. But he had many friends back in the bay area who were worth hundreds of millions of dollars and the reality of his relative poverty absolutely ate him alive - it was virtually the only thing he could talk about and explained his adventures in futures trading.
Hilariously, I once watched him berate his two temp agency receptionists (who made $7 an hour) because his monthly income had dropped from $40K to $25K, as if it was their fault and they could be expected to give a shit in the first place.
Really seems like this is just a blatant attempt to coerce Republican legislators though. "Give us more money or that precious right wing majority you grifted so hard to get installed might be at risk".
If you'd read the story, or even just the summary above, you'd know that this story, and his threat to quit was something that happened in early January, 2000, 23 years ago. He can't quit then, then isn't now.
Reading between the lines, the article suggests that the corruption that followed (his sort-of son's private tuition being paid off, the private jets to vacation on yachts, his wife getting a job at the Heritage Foundation and a six figure salary, etc.) was a result of his complaining that he wasn't getting paid enough.
When Richard Nixon was President, his salary was $200,000 /year and that was considered a fabulous sum. The inflated salaries of CEOs was a result of Reagan deregulating the banks.
He wouldn't even qualify for a security clearance with the kind of debt that he intentionally racked up, and that is explicitly because it would open him up to bribery.
Guess what? It did open him up to bribery! What a shock.
Maybe the people who serve in the most powerful levels of government should at least be able to qualify for a basic security clearance.