Judging the Judges

Brett Lieberman, who pens the aptly named Pennsyltucky Politics blog for the Harrisburg Patriot News, has written a post about the upcoming election (yes, there is an election -- November 6th) and the judicial races, in Judicial elections just painful for all, observing just why the name Pennsyltucky fits:

Pennsyltucky is one of only six states that elect judges. The others are Alabama, Illinois, Louisiana, Texas and West Virginia.

Unfortunately, nobody pays much attention to these races, which are funded by "lawyers, law firms and other interests whose cases they hear, creating the impression that justice is for sale."

Voters, meanwhile, are left clueless by candidates too afraid to say much about their opinions for fear of being accused of prejudging cases.

Instead name ID, gender, ballot position or whim often decide these races.

Yes, once again we are in league with Alabama, Louisiana, Texas and West Virginia. Lieberman's post was based upon an article by John Baer of the Daily News, Electing judges: Yet another field ripe for reform in Pa., which bemoans the crazy system in place in which we still elect Judges:

FOUR WEEKS from today, Nov. 6, a bunch of judges you never heard of stand for silly yes/no elections nobody pays attention to.

Others are on the ballot for a bunch of open seats.

Statewide turnout, with no action anywhere except that Montgomery County commissioners' race, will be very light.

So on the strength of limited and virtually blind voting, this is how we array our courts with men and women to whom we entrust our justice.

Shake your head with me.

* * * *

Now you're asked to consider retaining 67 judges, including seven statewide, 16 in Philadelphia; and to vote for dozens of candidates for other benches throughout the state.

Good luck.

That we elect statewide judges at all is insane.

As they've noted, this is a big problem. I consider myself to be fairly informed on political issues and I make sure to read up on the various judicial races prior to the election. I also know that I am in the small minority that has any idea of who's actually running in the judicial races. I read the Bar Association recommendations (although I don't always agree with their assessments), I sometimes personally know the candidates, and I try to read whatever is out there about the candidates. But it's not easy. Even with all this, I sometimes feel unqualified to decide who should be on the bench. And yet, they have a lot of power once they don their robes, so it's important to get the right people.

Added to this overall incompetent way we elect Judges is the recent backlash against all incumbents due to the recent controversy over pay raises in Pennsylvania. The Supreme Court didn't help things by deciding the the raises (later repealed by the legislature) should nonetheless be given to the judiciary. Stupid, arrogant move that.

A reform group has gained support in it's efforts to clean out some of these greedy politicians who didn't get the hint that the public wasn't too happy with raises for the legislative and judicial branches when the economy wasn't so hot for the taxpaying public in the Commonwealth. I confess that I felt some glee in seeing some of these people knocked over, finally realizing that sometimes accountability does occur. Yet the reformers, Pa Clean Sweep, seems to be sweeping with too wide a brush.

As Hank Grezlak of the Legal Intelligencer said, in Throwing Out All of the Judges Will Only Make Things Worse:

I'll admit that ever since the public decided to take a flame-thrower to certain elements of Pennsylvania's government in the wake of the pay-raise fiasco, I've often been amused, and in some cases downright pleased, to see various politicians and judges forced to realize that they are essentially public employees who actually serve at the discretion of the people.

For me, the pyrotechnics have been heart-warming. It's not often that you get to see the Powers That Be in Pennsylvania shook up. Or taken to task for Pennsylvania's clubby political culture, with all its wink-winks and midnight legislative deals done when the state's taxpayers are home in bed.

* * * *

Having said all that, I have only one question for the folks at PACleanSweep, who have advocated throwing out all the judges up for retention: Are you guys nuts, or just plain stupid?

The idea of throwing out every single judge up for retention is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. If their initiative is successful, it will weaken our courts horribly, and in an ironic twist given that PACleanSweep seems to model itself as a reform group, it will only lead to more political cronyism in our courts.

See also, First, We Kill All the Judges.

PA Clean Sweep should turn its reform efforts to merit selection of Judges, so we can get a little less Pennsyltucky -- in one area, at least.

Until then, be sure to learn as much as possible about the candidates. For info on the judicial races, see this roundup from the Legal Intelligencer, Judicial Elections Roundup Package.

* Signe Wilkinson, Philadelphia Daily News

Tags: Politics, Pennsylvania, Elections, Law