The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) sent a letter to Washington legislative leaders Friday detailing concerns with a bill that would establish taxpayer funded campaigns for the state Supreme Court.
The “Judicial Reform Act” would provide government funds to candidates for the state’s high court. Windfall benefits would be provided to participating candidates facing candidates who opt out of the scheme.
Federal judges in Arizona and Connecticut have ruled similar programs unconstitutional based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling in Davis v. Federal Election Commission. The Davis decision, which held that the state could not provide preferential benefits to some candidates based on the spending of other candidates, relied on a 1994 appellate court case striking down “rescue fund” provisions in Minnesota’s taxpayer financing program.
“This bill has serious constitutional and policy problems,” said CCP Research & Government Relations Director Laura Renz. “Passing this legislation after two similar state programs were just ruled unconstitutional would be like playing roulette with the judiciary—using taxpayer dollars.”
Providing taxpayer financing for judicial candidates does not effectively limit the ability of organized interest groups to support favored candidates, either directly or indirectly. Because such programs typically require candidates to gather relatively large numbers of small contributions in order to qualify for taxpayer funds, candidates often must turn to either party organizations or organized interest groups in order to gather small contributions.
This legislation would also not limit the ability of outside interest groups to run ads supporting or opposing a candidate-nor could it under the Constitution. In North Carolina, which has tax financing for state Supreme Court candidates, a group called “Fairjudges.net” spent approximately $260,000 in support of four candidates for North Carolina’s Supreme Court in 2006, including three candidates participating in that state’s system of taxpayer funding for judicial candidates. The state Democratic Party, a major funder of Fairjudges.net along with the Service Employees International Union and the state’s plaintiffs’ lawyers association, spent an additional $125,000 independently in support of the candidates, bringing the combined total to $385,000. This was more than was spent by three of the four candidates running, all of whom were elected. These groups, along with traditionally conservative groups like business associations and pro-life groups, cannot be muzzled under this bill.
CCP is representing a local judge in Wisconsin who is challenging that state’s recently-passed tax financing system for state Supreme Court candidates. The case is Koschnick v. Doyle.
The Center for Competitive Politics (CCP), is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization founded by former FEC Chairman Bradley A. Smith. CCP seeks to promote and protect the First Amendment political rights of speech, assembly and petition.
