Judges say reforms would reduce judicial campaign fund-raising

Judges presented a bill Monday to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee they say would eliminate the need for unopposed judges to raise campaign funds.

SB111 would require anyone seeking an elected judgeship to file their candidacy for office during January, instead of giving them until the end of May.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Deborah Agosti told the committee judicial candidates often announce their plans at the first of the year, but don't actually say which incumbent they intend to run against until they file in May.

"That puts all the judges in the position of going out and raising money," she said.

She and Justice Nancy Becker say the judges have no choice but to raise money for that five-month period because they want to keep their seat and don't know whether they'll actually have an opponent. But in the end, most judges wind up without an opponent.

As a result, Becker told lawmakers, judges raised $1.2 million last year on what would eventually turn out to be uncontested races.

In addition to requiring anyone seeking judicial office to file by the end of January, Agosti said the bill would be accompanied by a change in Judicial Canons prohibiting any judicial candidate from raising money until after the close of filing.

"We will know in January whether or not any races are contested," said Becker. "It would take the majority of judges, certainly those who are uncontested, out of the business of raising money."

The justices said that would help improve the general public's opinion and respect for judges.

"One of the criticisms of our elected judiciary is the majority of people who contribute to judicial races are included to be involved in litigation," said Becker.

She said that includes major law firms and corporations.

"That leads to an impression by the general public that the judiciary is being bought," she said.

"It's an issue of trust and confidence and anything we can do to improve the confidence in judges benefits all of us," said Agosti.

Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, commended the judges for bringing campaign finance reform to the Legislature, saying SB111 is a good idea. She said she'd like to consider whether the same restrictions could be imposed on local political races as well.

"Local government officials can take a check in the morning and go down and vote on a zoning issue in the afternoon," she said.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, expressed reservations, however. He said lawmakers decided to move the period for filing for all offices to May and he's reluctant to make the judges different.

And he repeated the pitch supported by many judges in Nevada to change the state's elected judiciary to the so-called "Missouri Plan." Under the Missouri plan judges are appointed in a merit-style system but then must run periodically against their own record with voters casting ballots to either retain or remove a judge. A judge who loses that election is then removed and replaced with another appointed judge.

"We wouldn't have any of this problem -- or at least it would be minimal since judges would be running on their record," he said.

The committee took no action on the bill.