Cyrus Dugger

No room for special-interest politics in judicial elections

Here’s a great op-ed from the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

No room for special-interest politics in judicial elections

The State Bar of Georgia never endorses candidates. But we are in favor of non-partisan elections for judges—and have been for 25 years. Judges in Georgia may be elected, but they are not politicians. And if we politicize judicial elections, it is at our peril. The public trust demands clean hands and impartial courts—but, in my book, clean hands and dirty politics don’t mix.

When political operatives with flexible ethics try to manufacture a “grassroots” movement to skew public opinion and shield their donors from tax codes and election laws, they are engaging in “astroturfing.”

Federal election laws limit what’s known as “hard money” political contributions to $1,000 per person or $5,000 per Political Action Committee. But the same rules don’t apply to “independent committees” and “527s” (named after an IRS code loophole) that can “legally” raise unlimited sums of “soft money” from individuals, corporations, and unions as long as they aren’t using it for or against a particular candidate. Six years ago, Congress passed a public disclosure law for all 527s, but when a 527’s operators are determined to be evasive, it’s difficult—if not impossible—to get the full story on who’s really driving their organization.

In Georgia, eight “independent committees” have registered in the past year alone—“indicating that there will be an increase in special interest participation this year,” according to Deborah Goldberg, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU.

One of these “independent committees,” the Safety and Prosperity Coalition, has already been accused of funneling large “soft money” contributions into Georgia’s upcoming non-partisan Supreme Court election. (See “State’s highest court isn’t for purchase,” Jay Bookman in the Journal-Constitution, October 5.)

“Astroturfing” is misleading enough in partisan politics. But it’s especially deceptive and destructive when it comes to judicial elections. Such tactics—artificial grassroots, stealth funding, and polarized rhetoric—threaten judicial integrity and impartiality. Fairness and impartiality are essential qualities for the judiciary’s role in our system of checks and balances. But to remain fair and impartial, judges cannot be beholden to special interests or fearful of being unseated by an opponent who can be backed by special interest groups.

“When special interests use their disproportionate financial power to oust judges who do not rule in their favor, the ability of judges to be fair and impartial is in danger,” Brennan’s Goldberg warned.

In our country’s Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers railed against King George III for obstructing a free judiciary and subjecting judges to his own will. At that time in America, the monarch ruled the courts, not the law. The king and his ministers influenced verdicts to suit their personal or political advantage.

After freeing themselves from England, our founders were adamant about creating a nation driven by the Rule of Law, not the Rule of Men. The Rule of Law ensures that nobody’s above the law, that all of us play by the same rules. To achieve their vision, the founders established an independent judicial branch that would be accountable to the Constitution as the supreme law of the land—not to the executive branch nor the legislative branch.

Special interest groups that employ 527s and other tactics to mislead voters and duck election laws want to secure the rule of men, not the rule of law. After all, men are easier to manipulate and control than the constitution. And that’s precisely what our founders sought to prevent.

Jay Cook is president of the State Bar of Georgia. He practices law in Athens. . (link)

Nina Mason of Crane MetaMarketing assisted in the development and publication of this op-ed in the Atlanta Journal Constitution on October 10, 2006

Posted at 9:38 AM, Dec 11, 2006 in Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)