The courts, the ultimate target
October 13, 2011
The drumbeat to discredit judicial elections goes on, so this bears repeating: Judicial elections are becoming both more expensive and more unpleasant because the courts are the one place Liberals can go to obtain by decree what they are unable to obtain through legislation.
Liberals deplore the cost of judicial campaigns hoping voters won’t notice much of the interest-group spending is self-defense: Get people nodding their heads in agreement that campaign spending is inherently bad and you’ve moved taxpayers toward unilateral disarmament.
Let’s dig into the details, specifically those relevant to the Justice at Stake (JAS) campaign to end judicial elections.
The JAS board includes an assortment of law professors, two Clinton appointees to the federal bench, the top lobbyist for the Illinois teachers union, and the head of Illinois Campaign for Political Reform who is also on the board of the Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice.
We bring this up not because the JAS is unique, but because it typifies the groups toiling away to end judicial elections: standard issue Liberals who increasingly dislike the choices made by voters and are perfectly willing to end-run the popular will if that’s what it takes to enforce their enlightened views.
As for State Senator Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center) teaming up with Sen. Tim Cullen (D-Janesville) to write Supreme Court elections out of the state Constitution, this is the act of a Republican who has never been able to disbelieve what Democrats say about his party; in other words, the political equivalent of Little Red Riding Hood begging the Big Bad Wolf to go out on a date.
Supreme courts decide whether the enactments of elected legislatures will stand. They don’t protect the people; only the ballot does that.