Personal tools

Argument: Merit, not money, should sway judicial elections

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

"Electing judges-with cash". Cody Corliss. January 30,2008: "Now that a judge can be more open about his or her beliefs, money is flowing into judicial campaigns as never before. The 2006 judicial campaign season was the highest spending on record, according to Justice at Stake, a nonpartisan monitoring group. That year, business interests gave $15.3 million to judicial candidates while attorneys kicked in another $7.4 million. Third-party interest advertising accounted for another $8.5 million. One can only imagine that 2008 will be another record year.So what can we do to end the money exchange in state judicial elections? Simply put, it's time to end judicial elections on the state's highest courts." The main problem with the requirement that candidates spend large sums of money to compete in judicial election campaigns is that it limits the prospective pool of candidates to the rich, powerful, and well-connected. These things have nothing to do with judicial merit.

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits