The worst thing that has ever happened to U.S. elections was the no-holds barred introduction of campaign contributions granted to corporations and other outside groups by the 2010 U.S. Supreme decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
Ever since, money determines the candidates, often eliminating the brightest and best suited for the job.
“Dark money” — contributions that can’t be traced to their donors — floods today’s campaigns to fund special causes. Dark money is the largest source of campaign donations in today’s presidential elections, shattering records with every subsequent election.
Armed with this knowledge, we question why Kansas legislators are proposing the state Constitution be amended so that the seven seats on the Kansas Supreme Court be determined by popular vote.
The change is being proposed by the Federal and State Affairs Committee. Sen. Mike Thompson, R- Shawnee, is its chair. The full Senate is to consider the measure Tuesday.
Currently, members of the Kansas Supreme Court are decided on merit.
The process begins with a nominating commission, consisting primarily of attorneys, that puts forward three nominees from which the Governor ultimately decides. In our opinion, there’s no harsher critic than one’s peers.
As a result, Kansas’ Supreme Court is as free of politics as can be expected in today’s climate where social issues take undue precedence in legal matters.
Probably the truest test of an unbiased Court is that at one time or another everyone is going to disagree with its decisions.
The Senate committee proposing the change to the Kansas Constitution say electing the Supreme Court Justices by popular vote would further democracy.
We contend the election of justices would remove critical safeguards.
For instance, say a special interest group with buckets of money and a lot to lose from an unfavorable decision, and there are many, underwrote the campaign of a candidate beholden to their cause. In a flash, voters are inundated by fliers, emails and text messages promoting John or Jane Doe as the best candidate for the Kansas Supreme Court.
Not a stretch of the imagination, right?
Whether he or she is the most qualified candidate, they certainly have gained the most recognition running up to Election Day and win the contest.
If adopted, the new law would politicize the judiciary beyond recognition, giving special interest groups power over our state’s highest court.
As for the new justices, the process could incentivize them to issue decisions that they think will win them votes and satisfy their donors instead of impartially deciding cases based solely on the facts and the law.
