Voters Believe Money Influences Courts,
Support Bold Reforms, Says New Study
by N.C. Center for Voter Education
Click here to download a PowerPoint presentation of the full poll results.
June 28, 2005
For immediate release.
Contact: Bryan Warner, N.C. Center for Voter Education, (919) 839-1200
Voters Believe Money Influences Courts, Support Bold Reforms, Says New Study by N.C. Center for Voter Education
RALEIGH – Troubled by what they perceive as the potentially negative impact of special interest influence over their state’s courts, North Carolina voters overwhelmingly support the preservation of the state’s unique system of public financing for judicial campaigns, and may back broader reforms.
A study released today by the nonpartisan N.C. Center for Voter Education reveals that voters also want more information on judicial candidates, and would favor a shift in the way judges are elected to the state’s highest courts. The survey was conducted earlier this month by the Alexandria, VA-based polling firm American Viewpoint. The margin of error is +/- 3.5 percent.
“The public mood about judges is not very favorable at this point in time,” said the Center’s Executive Director Chris Heagarty.
Recent news stories have questioned the fundraising of some state trial court judges, and nationwide there has been frustration by conservatives and liberals alike over recent federal court rulings. Only 48 percent of those surveyed express a favorable opinion of the judiciary, while 28 percent say they hold an unfavorable opinion.
“That’s mediocre at best,” explained Randall Gutermuth, political director for American Viewpoint. “As a point of reference, a typical political candidate should have a favorable to unfavorable ratio of around three-to-one in order to be competitive, or at least 60 percent favorable to 20 percent unfavorable”
The list of criticisms includes many dealing with how judges are elected.
Nearly nine out of 10 polled believe that campaign contributions to judges can too often lead to conflicts of interest. Three-quarters of voters feel that because there is not enough information on judicial candidates, judges are elected for reasons other than their qualifications. This concern is shared by Republicans and Democrats alike.
Other criticisms include a majority of citizens (55 percent) agreeing with the notion that judges too often make their decisions based on their own beliefs, rather than on the Constitution or laws passed by the state legislature.
Even though many legal scholars will argue that judges should be uninfluenced by public opinion in deciding cases, voters disagree. A majority of voters (59 percent) feel judges should take into account the will of the people when making rulings.
The good news, according to the N.C. Center for Voter Education, is that people do see improvement through recent changes to how some judges are elected. A strong majority of nearly 75 percent of voters favors North Carolina’s system of public campaign financing for judicial elections.
In the program, qualified candidates for the N.C. Supreme Court or N.C. Court of Appeals who refuse special interest money and agree to strict fundraising and spending limits can receive financial aid in their campaigns. Additionally, all candidates for these offices are now listed in the new nonpartisan state judicial voter guide, which is mailed to every North Carolina household. Nearly 4 million copies of the guide were mailed during the 2004 elections.
The Public Campaign Fund, which provides the voter guides and some financing for candidates, comes out of taxpayer money. But so anxious are voters about special interests meddling in their state’s justice system, that more people (49 percent) say they would pick the candidate who accepted taxpayer money to run his campaign over a candidate who used special interest money (28 percent), if the candidates were alike in every other way.
“Even conservative Republicans, who are traditionally the most anti-tax voters, by a margin of 44 to 28 percent would cast their ballot for the candidate who refuses special interest cash,” said Heagarty.
In addition to continuing the current public financing program, the Center has explored other reforms, such as lowering campaign contribution limits for local trial court judges from $ 4,000 to $ 1,000; including trial court judges in local versions of judicial voter guides; and possibly creating a similar program of public aid for trial court judges that agree to limit their spending.
One of the most surprising findings of the study is that a majority of voters favors changing the way judges are elected in North Carolina.
Presently, competing candidates for the N.C. Supreme Court and N.C. Court of Appeals face off in a statewide, nonpartisan race. However, about 65 percent of those polled say that because voters lack information on judges, the current process allows judicial activists and unqualified candidates to win a seat on the court.
As such, a majority also believes that the system should be modified to allow for enhanced screening of candidates while ensuring that judges are still accountable to voters.
A proposed plan would have judges appointed by the governor to serve for a limited term on the N.C. Supreme Court or N.C. Court of Appeals. Once the term is up, the judges would face a vote by the people of the state to determine whether they remain on the court or are dismissed.
“While past research has shown some resistance to judicial appointments, the introduction of public confirmations gives voters assurances that judges will be held accountable for their actions and decisions,” said Gutermuth.
Even as this new research reveals a public greatly concerned about the flow of money in the campaigns for their courts and troubled by the virtual anonymity often assigned to many judicial candidates, voters appear ready to protect the integrity of justice in North Carolina.
"What should not be lost is that voters, while profoundly concerned, are also very willing to support sound measures to deal with the problems North Carolina’s judicial elections face,” said Heagarty. “To see Republicans and Democrats in agreement about reducing special interest influence and empowering voters with more information is important – and cause for optimism.”
These results come just days after the Center released findings on voter opinions regarding the state’s executive branch.
For more information on either poll, visit www.ncvotered.com, or contact the N.C. Center for Voter Education at (919) 839-1200.
# # #
(The North Carolina Center for Voter Education is a nonpartisan and nonprofit organization, based in Raleigh, dedicated to increasing voter awareness and participation.)
© Copyright 2008 N.C. Center for Voter Education
743 W. Johnson St.
Suite E
Raleigh, NC 27603
919.839.1200
www.ncvotered.com