Here’s an essay from the Center for American Progress about the need for reforming how judicial elections are financed. It features North Carolina’s public financing program and discusses ways it could be improved with a new provision that said qualifying candidates could receive supplementary public funds to match small donations they raise from voters, up to a limit. Such a provision is especially worth considering because the US Supreme Court has thrown out “rescue funds” as a reasonable way to address cases where outside groups spend large amounts for one candidate, as occurred this year with the Newby-Ervin contest in NC.