Opinion
Top court race needs fairness
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Suchita Shah:
- Grad speakers sorely lacking (April 30, 2008)
- Onus for funds on UW students (April 23, 2008)
- Arts education gravely ignored (April 16, 2008)
- Multicultural groups enrich campus community (April 9, 2008)
- EPA not able to crack the whip (April 2, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
“Fair and balanced” — it is the vaunted ideal for our American court system and our judges.
But recent record-breaking expenditures on Wisconsin Supreme Court races threaten the very bedrock of impartiality upon which our judicial system is built. Lady Justice may be blind, but even a lack of sight cannot prevent her from noticing the millions of dollars being poured into the scale she holds, tipping the balance away from Wisconsin voters and toward the special interests. Without forward-thinking vision and dramatic campaign finance reform, we risk our state Supreme Court devolving into an institution that is no more “fair and balanced” than Fox News.
Last year’s Supreme Court justice race between Linda Clifford and Annette Ziegler shocked Wisconsinites into opening their eyes to witness what effectively amounted to buying a seat on the bench. The 2007 election saw total expenditures of roughly $6 million, more than four times the previous record in a Wisconsin court race.
Special interest groups with phony “issue ads” outspent both candidates combined. These groups are not required to disclose their spending in campaign finance reports, which, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, resulted in $2 out of every $3 in the 2007 race being concealed from the public. One organization, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, accounted for more than 40 percent of the total spending in the election — more than $2.4 million in support of Ms. Ziegler, $1 million more than her own campaign spent on the race. It also surpasses the 2006 special interest expenditures for the gubernatorial race between Jim Doyle and Mark Green. Combined. And that was an actual, explicit partisan race.
Thankfully, since that 2007 debacle, the state Senate took action and passed two vital bills targeting this disconcerting affront to judicial independence. The first, Senate Bill 77, requires full disclosure of special interest electioneering. The second, the Impartial Justice Bill (SB 171), was passed in the Senate last week. It lays the groundwork for a system of full public financing of state Supreme Court elections, in the hopes of preventing another auctioning of an election.
Although the Impartial Justice bill does not force public financing, it does make it a more realistic option for candidates for the high court. Individuals would have to prove their viability by fundraising a certain amount from a threshold number of donors statewide. In addition, the maximum campaign contributions for Supreme Court races would decrease to $1000 per individual or committee (compared to the current atrocious $10,000 for an individual and $8625 for a committee, not including issue ads). The bill coasted through the Senate, but the Republican-controlled Assembly is not likely to take it up soon.
A January 2008 survey by American Viewpoint found that more than 65 percent of Wisconsin voters strongly support a plan to offer public financing in judicial elections. Additionally, 78 percent of voters believe campaign contributions have a “great deal” or “some” influence on the decisions judges make in the courtrooms, and it is in the public’s interest for the Legislature to champion reform, allow the bill to come to a vote in the Assembly and preserve what impartiality remains in our Supreme Court. Ultimately in politics, perception is reality, and justices not only have to be fair and balanced, but they must also be perceived as such by the public.
We cannot delude ourselves into believing the problem ended with the 2007 election of Annette Ziegler. Rather, that was only the beginning of a new era and a contract we can hope to cut short.
We have yet another Supreme Court election upon us this spring, with Michael Gableman challenging incumbent Louis Butler. This race, too, is plagued by the pervasive pecuniary power of political action committees. Groups like the Greater Wisconsin Committee and the Club for Growth-Wisconsin have already spent $290,000 in airtime for “issue ads” supporting Mr. Butler and Mr. Gableman, with WMC poised to rear its ugly head once again. And it’s only February. How many more dollars will partisan players spend by the time the April 1 election rolls around?
It is time for the Legislature to step in and tip the scales back in favor of impartial justice and reclaim the Wisconsin Supreme Court from the influence of incendiary issue ads and the shady special interest expenditures. In December, all seven current justices signed a letter in support of “realistic, meaningful public financing.” Take heed, Speaker Mike Huebsch, R-West Salem, and bring this necessary reform to a vote in the Assembly.
The Impartial Justice bill is a significant and absolutely vital step toward fair and clean elections. The entire campaign finance system needs dramatic overhaul, but the election of Supreme Court justices is the direst case. The depoliticizing of the judicial system is not inherently a partisan issue; no group should be able to buy justice. Hopefully, it will not take another purchased election to force our representatives to open their eyes.
Suchita Shah (sshah@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in neurobiology.
2 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
Do you ever talk about contentious issues, Queen Bee?
Only if the strong male leaders behind her say its alright