|
...polarization" the process appointing federal judges and in more and more of the 39 states in which judges face some type of elections: "This isn't a problem just in a few places where court elections have become circuses." (1)
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Even overseas, The Economist headlined a story "Guilty, Your Honour?" "This year's judicial elections may be worryingly free-speaking.... Judicial elections have grown more contentious, and so more costly, with business and lawyers' groups spending huge sums in contests where tort law is at stake." (2)
The 2004 Elections
These reports got it essentially right. The 2004 judicial elections were near the levels they leapt to in 2000 and continued in 2002: heavy spending, heavy involvement by non-candidate groups (like the Chamber of Commerce on one side--active in 15 races spread across 12 states in 2004--and plaintiffs' trial lawyers and unions on the other (3)), and campaign conduct--especially by the outside groups--that included sharply negative attacks which might be ordinary in non-judicial elections but are a dramatic departure from the era when these elections were "about as exciting as a game of checkers ... played by mail." (4)
Several striking features were new in 2004. In perhaps the most heated election, in which a West Virginia Supreme Court incumbent was defeated, an all-time record was set for an individual contribution in a judicial race--by the CEO of a coal company active in West Virginia and with one lawsuit pending before the Supreme Court and another that may reach there. The CEO (not himself a West Virginian) gave at least $2,260,000 (some reports say his total involvement in the race reached $3.5 million) to "And for the Sake of Kids," which attacked one 3-2 decision in which the incumbent had been in the majority. (5) (The previous record was $200,000 in a 1982 Texas primary. (6)) The race was "noted for money and malice." (7) The candidates themselves raised $2.8 million and "527" groups spent, in total, an additional $4.5 million. (8)
In a new high for spending by judicial candidates, two running for one open Illinois Supreme Court seat spent $9 million (all in the general election and all in one down-state district), spending almost identical amounts. Interest groups spent $1,201,000 and political parties spent another $3,284,000 to run television ads to help or harm one of the candidates (also, two groups spent $195,000 on TV ads attacking the state Supreme Court itself for allegedly...
NOTE: All illustrations and photos
have been removed from this article.
More articles from Spectrum: the Journal of State Government
2004 initiatives and referendums.(SYMPOSIUM: Aftermath of 2004 Electio..., January 01, 2005
Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.
Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication
name or publication date.
About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company
analysis or best practices in managing your organization,
Goliath can help you meet your business needs.
Our extensive business information databases empower business
professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible,
authoritative information they need to support their business
goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting,
company research or defining management best practices -
Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.
|
%20%20&position=1)