Jul 28, 2006

why Washington State needs an independent judiciary

If this Seattle Times article doesn't convince you, I don't know what will.

5 comments:

Mark said...

You may be interested to know that I am working this summer for the Adminstrative Office of the Courts as a researcher and my biggest and most interesting project is doing the research for a commission of Superior Court judges on the topic of Judicial Elections/Appointment/Retention and Campaign Finance/Expenditure.

That said, even though they want to do something, I dont feel we will get rid of elections anytime soon - even though it does completely undermine the whole principle of the judiciary.

"Keeping them accountable to voters" is the exact opposite of what they are supposed to be.

Jim Anderson said...

Sweet--blog about it, if you can. (By the way, since you have enough time to blog consistently, you're hitting the permanent roll in a moment.)

I would see a compromise, at least at the state level, of longer, one-shot terms. That way you'd be elected, but wouldn't have to worry about massaging your opinions for another term.

Mark said...

I can blog about my research and my opinions, I cant blog about what they are discussing or what Im presenting, though you can ask for Public Disclosure if you so wish ;)

And of course I can blog - I work a job don't I?

And I dont know what the permanent roll is, but Ill take it as a good thing.

Anonymous said...

It's the list of "blogs of note" to the right.

Mark said...

Ah, I see - consider me flattered, but it doesnt work...

Is that what you think of me Mr. A?