Don't feel too sorry for discouraged Missouri conservatives
Barb ShellyThe folks who wanted changes in Missouri’s method of selecting judges have decided they won’t campaign for their ballot proposition, saying the ballot language written by Secretary of State Robin Carnahan is “deceptive and hopelessly biased.”
But here’s the thing. State legislators had the opportunity to write the ballot language when they voted to put the proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot for voter approval. They declined to do so, and left the job up to Carnahan, a Democratic official who naturally may not view things quite the same way as the Republican majority in the legislature.
In Carnahan’s defense, she had a maximum of 50 words to sum up the changes the legislature wanted in the makeup of a judicial nominating commission. She chose to focus on the provisions that allow the governor to “appoint a majority of the commission that selects these court nominees; and appoint all lawyers to the commission by removing the requirement that the governor’s appointees be nonlawyers.”
The governor doesn’t have to appoint all lawyers, and there’s no reason to think that would happen. But the legislation opens up the possibility, and that’s what Carnahan zeroed in on. The proposed constitutional amendment will remain on the ballot, and I would expect that the Missouri Bar and other opponents will continue to mount some kind of an informational campaign to try to get it defeated.
I’d also expect that, whatever happens in November, Republicans will continue to press for changes in Missouri’s judicial selection process. It works excellently but presents a burr in the saddle of conservatives.
Phil Cardarella
7 months, 2 weeks agoThe Missouri Plan is the envy of other states — but it makes it very hard for rich individuals or corporations to either buy or threaten judges to get their desired decisions. THAT IS A GOOD THING.
However, that is VERY frustrating to those who do wish to be able to buy or threaten judges to get their way — as they have in other states. So, they were planning to buy the State Consititution.
George Hunsucker
Northland
7 months, 2 weeks agoHow can a plan where lawyers dominate the process to select those who oversee them be the envy of other states phil?
It strains the sensibilities to think foxes should be in charge of the henhouse…..
Phil Cardarella
7 months, 2 weeks agoWell, George, it is.
The great thing about the Missouri System — in which both lawyers and lay panel members have an equal say in the panel submitted to the Governor — is that it results in judges who are FAIR to both sides of an issue. That is why only two judges have ever failed to be retained by voters since the system began in the 1940’s.
“Lawyers” are not an homogenous group. We represent plaintiffs AND defendants. The interest of those lawyers on the Commissions is to pick those who they know will be fair to both sides.
Now, a Governor Ashcroft might appoint a judge who is marginally more conservative than a Governor Carnahan might — but neither could appoint an extremist because the system prevents an extremeist from ever being on a panel.
The fact is that some wealthy individuals and corporations have no interest in judges who are fair and objective. They want judges who will rule the way they like. And they want to be able either to hand-pick new judges or threaten sitting judges (just like Tea Partiers and Grover Norquist intimidate GOP moderates).
Do you really think that the judiciary would be better off if the horribly divisive politics and unlimited secret money that now dominates were extended to the judiciary?