The end of 2010 marks the eighth year that North Carolina’s voluntary public campaign financing program for statewide judicial candidates has been in effect – long enough for it to be used or rejected in the staggered election cycles that have now involved all 22 seats on the state’s Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. An analysis by Democracy North Carolina shows that a large majority of candidates across ideological, racial and gender lines have enrolled in the program, and this broad popularity has had a significant impact on increasing the diversity of judges on the two courts and reducing the role of special-interest money in their elections. When the NC Supreme Court and Court of Appeals convene next year, 17 of the 22 members (77%) will be judges who successfully qualified for public financing in their campaigns. The 17 include all 11 women and the three African Americans elected to the two courts. . . .
Judicial Elections Category
You are welcome to submit comments to this moderated blog. Please treat others with respect, avoid partisan rhetoric, and help us provide a fact-based discussion of issues related to North Carolina’s political landscape. Thank you.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Friday, November 19th, 2010
While partisan opponents of “Voter-Owned Elections” will control the NC General Assembly next year, other parts of the nation will experience new advances for public campaign financing. West Virginia reformers held an event this week to celebrate that state’s new pilot program for Supreme Court elections, and Maine reformers threw a 10th birthday party yesterday for their first-in-the-nation “clean elections” program; well over 70% of the legislators elected in Maine, from both major parties, used the program. Larry Lessig entertained the party-goers in Maine with a rapid-fire slide show on why the clean elections idea is so important – and why it will continue to thrive despite the desire of “free market” fanatics to turn elections into auctions.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Monday, October 25th, 2010
Two websites provide background and instructions, including a video, about the Instant Runoff Voting method being used this year in three local Superior Court races and one statewide Court of Appeals election. The Court of Appeals race, which is the nation’s first use of IRV in a statewide general election, has a certain historical fascination. In 2008, a black man was at the top of every ballot in North Carolina, in the race for US President. In 2010, a black man is at the bottom of every ballot, in the NC Court of Appeals IRV contest involving 13 candidates. Both men have quite unusual names: one is Barack Obama; the other is Cressie Thigpen. In both cases, voting a “straight party” ticket would not include a vote for or against them; voters must vote in the Presidential and Court elections separately. Both men graduated from prestigious law schools, taught at other law schools, and gained prominent endorsements across race and party lines for their campaigns; Thigpen is endorsed by white Republican and Democratic former chief justices of the NC Supreme Court. Obama and Thigpen were both born in the month of August. And so on.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Tuesday, September 7th, 2010
Ready or not, Instant Runoff Voting will be used to fill the recent vacancy on the NC Court of Appeals created when Judge Jim Wynn stepped down to serve on the federal court. Gov. Bev Perdue appointed Judge Cressie Thigpen a couple weeks ago to fill the seat temporarily, until a winner in November begins a new eight-year term. Thigpen is the former law partner of Dan Blue, former president of the State Bar, and a Superior Court judge. He’s the only African American among 13 candidates who have filed for the seat. The State Board of Elections last week voted unanimously to produce and mail to 4 million households a special edition of the Judicial Voter Guide (paid for by the Public Campaign Fund, not general tax dollars), with profiles of the candidates and an explanation of how to use Instant Runoff Voting. Commentators are right to wish another method could be used to fill these late vacancies, including merit selection, but the NC constitution and state law don’t provide much wiggle room. Sadly, IRV opponents are ready to distort the truth to score points, as I pointed out in a recent blog response. The focus should be on educating voters about the candidates, the voting method, and perspectives on who’s the best judge for the job.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Tuesday, August 17th, 2010
A 120-page report by a trio of nonprofit groups analyzes the $207 million spent on the nation’s state judicial elections over the past decade, more than double the amount spent in the previous decade. Self interested “super-spenders” are especially fueling the arms race that aims to turn “blind justice” into “justice for sale.” A forward by y former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, state reports (including a shout-out to the achievements of North Carolina’s public financing program), and analysis of 29 expensive campaigns earned the report wide media coverage, for example, by the Washington Post, National Public Radio, and the Associated Press.
