Every year, bankruptcy judges go to school, compliments of the Federal Judicial Center (FJC). The FJC runs a continuing education program for virtually all federal judges, including bankruptcy judges. With more than 300 of us out there, though, it is not really feasible to do the program all at once, so the FJC offers the continuing education program in three different locations. We get to select which city we want to go to, but to balance things out, we may have to settle for our second or even our third choice.

This year, I went to Minneapolis, a city that I love. I once lived there, a long time ago. Come to think of it, it was a long time ago, almost 25 years. I guess I'm getting old.

That's what struck me at this most recent gathering of a third of my colleagues. We are getting old. It's almost impossible to believe (and truly impossible to accept) that I am turning 50 this year. So are a lot of my colleagues. It seems that quite a few of us bankruptcy judges are right around the same age—late 40s to early 50s. At one time, we used to think of ourselves as a young bench. But reality is setting in, as the frequent tales of physical ailments from so many of my fellow judges at this FJC seminar attested.

Of course, I take some small comfort in realizing that I am not alone. The bankruptcy bar is greying too. Perhaps one of the reasons that the bankruptcy bench has people my age on it is that the circuit courts often tapped lawyers who were just then making a name for themselves in the bankruptcy arena, a relatively large group of relatively young lawyers just then moving into what was then a booming and exciting new practice area. But we've all been at it for some time now—15 to 20 years.

This fall, the Bankruptcy Code will "celebrate" (if that's a fair characterization) its 19th anniversary. Many of the "hot" issues have cooled down, and many of the untested theories have now been tested (some have been discarded). The Code today offers a much more predictable mechanism to those who use it, and those who must endure it. It seems not to be quite so much fun as it used to be, when everything was new, when new theories abounded, when lawyers and judges alike would hotly debate the finer points of adequate protection, of cramdown, of executory contracts.

But my friends remind me that 50 is not that old, and that, in any event, you are only as old as you feel. I suppose that even applies to the bankruptcy law. Indeed, the exciting debates that the work of the Commission have generated give proof to the fact that bankruptcy law still offers challenges, not just for the lawyers, but for the policy-makers. Perhaps the Commission will not recommend the sweeping overhaul that its predecessor from the early 1970s did. Yet the indications are that this Commission has hardly been shy about tackling the thorniest policy issues in bankruptcy today, nor are they shy about proposing innovative solutions. These are exciting times, even for us old folks.

These are also exciting times for the bankruptcy bench. More than 200 of us will reach the end of our 14-year terms over the next few years, and that presents us with some choices. For some of my colleagues, there will be no real decision to be made—they will seek re-appointment. And who can blame them? It has been said that the sense of job satisfaction among bankruptcy judges is far higher than one finds in most other professions. Many of us would much rather continue on the bench than return to the hurly-burly of practice. Their decision is made that much easier for them by the fact that practice has changed so dramatically over the last 10 or 12 years.

But many judges are already considering other alternatives. Some are forced into the choice by economic reality. Their children are entering college, and tuition expenses are often not compatible with the salary of a judge—especially when that salary is fixed. For these judges, the only choice may be to return to practice, like it or not. Other judges I have spoken with are considering alternatives for a different reason. They simply no longer find the job as challenging, as much fun as it once was. For the most part, the bankruptcy bench (thanks to the commitment of the circuit courts) is staffed with bright, inquisitive people. They did not "retire" into the position, but instead sought it out as a new challenge, as an opportunity to make a difference. When the challenge is gone, so also, it seems, is the reason for being on the bench.

A few judges I know are thinking of leaving the bench to teach, or consult, or write, or start a new career. I would not be surprised to see some of our colleagues take up teaching positions at law schools or universities. Nor would I be surprised to find a judge or two show up in a consulting position, or starting a new business. We might even have a John Grisham or two in our midst.

The worst thing that could happen to us, however, would be to succumb to boredom, to "settle in" to the job, assuming all the challenges are past and that there is little more to enjoy from being a judge than the occasional opportunity to bang around an unfortunate lawyer on a slow day. I've known of judges like that. Fortunately, they weren't bankruptcy judges, for the most part, though I suspect some of us are not immune from that worst of sins—lawyer abuse. If that's where I ever find myself, then I'll know its time to start looking for another job.

Well, this column really has taken on the quality of the ruminations of an old man. But I'm far from old, after all. Older, to be sure. And more experienced as well (I just passed my 10-year anniversary on the bench). Hopefully, for the lawyers and litigants who appear in my court, all that has translated into my being a "better" judge. By better, I certainly do not mean smarter. The accumulated experience of these last 10 years, and the accumulated life experience of these last 50 years, ought to translate into some fairly tangible benefits—benefits the entire bankruptcy system is hopefully enjoying today. Benefits such as the ability to decide cases quickly, to know when to push and when to lay back and say nothing, to know restraint in all aspects of the job, to be able to apply one's experience to achieve something closer to true justice. The bankruptcy system has, in its greying bench, an extraordinary resource, an army of veterans. I don't know what I'm going to do in four years, and I certainly don't plan on making any disclosures in this column. But as a general observation, I certainly hope that the bankruptcy system can retain a substantial portion of the judges whose terms are coming to an end over the next few years. The system, I think, would be better for it.