Story originally printed in the Winona Daily News or online at www.winonadailynews.com
Published - Thursday, May 08, 2008
O’Connor: Wisconsin justices shouldn’t be elected
MILWAUKEE — There’s a better way to select Wisconsin justices than by allowing voters to pick them, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said Wednesday.
A number of states have bipartisan committees that choose a candidate, she said, and after the judge has served for six years voters get to decide whether to retain the judge.
“It’s worked beautifully in Arizona,” she said of her home state. “I’m so proud of how it’s worked there and the quality of the judges that we have.”
No other country elects its judges, she said, and America only began the practice under the Andrew Jackson administration.
O’Connor acknowledged that it would be difficult to change the system in Wisconsin, but her comments could embolden critics of the current system tainted recently by nasty campaign tactics and outside money.
O’Connor commented during a presentation to a group of Marquette University law students, where she was joined by Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson.
Abrahamson agreed that recent elections for Wisconsin justices pointed to a need overhaul the system. Her solution, as she has stated previously, would be to make the races publicly funded, reducing the influence of third-party donors largely responsible for smear tactics of recent races.
“I favor elections in Wisconsin. I think we should work to repair the defects that have appeared,” she said. “We have had the elective system since 1848. It’s up to all of us to make sure the elective system works.”
Abrahamson, a 32-year veteran of the court and chief justice for the past 12, is herself up for re-election next year. She is generally viewed as the court’s most liberal member and is likely to be targeted by the same groups that worked to defeat liberal candidates in the past two elections.
Last month, previously little-known Burnett County Circuit Judge Michael Gableman defeated incumbent Justice Louis Butler following a bitter and expensive round of campaigning. Gableman and Butler combined to spend about $1 million, but outside groups poured in an estimated $4.8 million.
O’Connor called many of the ads “misleading” and said they only served to make voters cynical.
The same spending patterns arose last year. Third-party groups spent about $3 million in the race won by Annette Ziegler who, along with opponent Linda Clifford, spent another $2.7 million.
The trend worries Abrahamson, who said the public will suspect that the justices are wrestling a conflict of interest. Justices who receive private donations can still be impartial, she said, but any skepticism can be eliminated altogether by having the races publicly funded.
She also said that dirty campaigns result in alienated voters who stay away from the polls.
“In the last election we had less than 20 percent of eligible voters voting,” she said. “As long as we have elections we need to do a better job of getting voters out.”
O’Connor also talked briefly of her time on the nation’s high court, saying every interaction among justices was collegial, and she decried the No Child Left Behind Act, which she said caused teachers to focus on math, science and reading to the exclusion of subjects such as civics and history.
“Barely one-third of Americans can name all three branches of government,” she lamented.
“I bet you they can name all three Stooges,” Abrahamson said to laughter.
All stories copyright 2000 - 2006 Winona Daily News and other attributed sources.