Mar 17 2011

The Role of Bingo Balls in Upcoming Elections

Published by under Judges

The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Daily News report that ballot positions have been selected for upcoming Philadelphia elections. The races affected by the drawing of positions include city council, city commission, register of wills, sheriff, Traffic Court judge, Municipal Court judge, and Common Pleas Court judge. Ballot positions were chosen by picking numbered bingo balls out of a coffee can, and “the drawing had the feel of a circus joined to a lottery.” Although there is clearly more involved in running a campaign than ballot position, it is telling that one candidate referred to the day as “one of the most important days in the election.” Another candidate, after receiving first position on the ballot, “literally danced out of the courtroom, saying in a sing-song voice ‘Hallelujah, thank you Jesus. Do the right thing and vote for Bloom in the spring.’”

In judicial elections ballot positioning is even more important because the candidates are often less well known and voters have less information to base their choice on. In addition, judicial races are lower on the ballot.

Citizens’ Voice announces that the Department of State in Harrisburg held a lottery to determine ballot positions for candidates running for Luzerne County judge. Political science professor Thomas Baldino said that ballot position is important, with candidates on the top preferred to those on the bottom. He went on to explain that in races with numerous candidates, positioning becomes more important due to “voter fatigue.” Although Pennsylvania’s proposed merit selection process only affects the appellate courts, we believe that increased public education and awareness are crucial in these judicial elections.

The position of judge is too important to be decided in part by the drawing of a numbered bingo ball.

Tags: , , , ,

No responses yet

Oct 28 2008

Philadelphia Magazine Examines the Crazy System of Electing Judges

Published by under Judges,Opinion

The November issue of Philadelphia Magazine includes a lengthy feature analyzing how judges get elected in Philadelphia.  Although the story focuses only on the process for electing local judges, it puts in sharp relief some of the major problems with using elections to pick judges: the randomness of the process and the money.

The article opens at the scene of the drawing of lots for ballot position:

It’s impossible to overstate the importance of ballot position when it comes to electing judges in Philadelphia. Nothing confirms our ignorance of judicial candidates as much as this: The first name we come to on the ballot is almost always one that is going to win.

After identifying some judges for reputations as not qualified to serve or for not possessing the requisite “judicial temperament,” the article hits the heart of the matter:

All of which raises the question: How do people like this end up on the bench in the first place? We know the answer, of course: We elect them. But if you’ve ever voted in a judicial election in Philadelphia (or anywhere in Pennsylvania), you also know that in most cases, you’re voting for little more than a name.

So, how do candidates achieve the required name recognition to win an election?  That’s where the campaign money comes in, and the article focuses on how candidates spend their money in Philadelphia judicial elections.  Candidates who want to win must “pony up to the real power brokers in our judicial elections — consultants. Their main job is to tell candidates which ward leaders should get their money.”  When the system works as designed, candidates pay the ward leaders for their get out the vote efforts.  Except, sometimes, according to the article, payments are made and services aren’t delivered as promised.

The author opines that this isn’t the real problem with the system, however:

[T]he bigger problem is the demand that our prospective judges — our judges — dive into a deal-making election process that becomes a test of whether they can close their eyes and hold their noses long enough to resurface with any moral equilibrium.

This is a good point that applies to all judicial elections, which emphasize fundraising and campaigning above skill and experience.  There’s got to be a better way.

Tags: , , ,

No responses yet