Miers and business, again

Ron Cass joins with Ken Starr in today’s W$J to emphasize Miers’ business credentials:

Business organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which alone represents over three million business enterprises, have praised Harriet Miers's nomination. They -- and we -- value her significant experience in business law. . . . . [T]he inevitable attention to other, politically charged issues should not obscure the importance of business expertise to the court and ultimately to the nation.

I have written skeptically on this point here and here, the latter post commenting on an earlier version of this op-ed by Cass alone. 

Since then I’ve seen nothing to change my mind, but something to make me worry even more:  Miers’ investing.  As discussed here, she apparently hasn't yet recognized the wonders of the portfolio theory. This makes me wonder whether how much sophistication Miers will bring to judging complex business issues.

I’m still reserving judgment until I see Miers’ performance in the Senate.  But, then, I’m still expecting Ernie Banks to some day lead the Cubs in the World Series.

Update: Gordon Smith analyzes Miers' record on business and doesn't come up with much.

Update 2:  Assuming Miers goes down, and we want a good business judge, Joe Miller asks, what about William Chandler of the Delaware Chancery Court? Is this so far-fetched?  The depressing thing is that whether this is at all realistic doesn't depend on the fact that he's a brilliant judge, one of the best business judges in the country, but on whether or where he goes to church.

Comments

[Ted]

She is 60, and may have considered herself close to retirement.

It's possible that her law firm is one of those that regulates their attorneys' trading very closely. I worked for one law firm that forbade any trading in specific equity investments without running a conflict check first, with the effective result that I invested my money in Treasuries and index funds rather than go through the hassle of real investment decisions.

Are we convinced that Miers was really making $600,000 a year on a regular basis? Law firm profits increased dramatically in the 1990s, and Miers was probably making much less for a good chunk of that time.

If we want a judge that we're sure understands portfolio theory, of course, I vote for Easterbrook.

I owe you a call; apologies that I haven't gotten back to you yet.

[Larry Ribstein]

Ted:
1. Stock or balanced index funds would have been both a sound investment strategy and (I assume) in compliance with any reasonable conflicts-avoidance policy.
2. A competent investment strategy at her age clearly would not involve eliminating equity investments.
3. I was criticizing Miers' lack of investment sophistication based on her asset allocation, not her net worth.
4. I wish we lived in a world in which a Justice Easterbrook was possible.