Beginning in September, 2006, with a presentation to LIWDA by Rich Robinson, Executive Director of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, the State/National Action Group (SNAG) from LIWDA spent more than a year studying Election Reform in general and Michigan Supreme Court election reform in particular.
LIWDA POSITION: We support Michigan Supreme Court Election Reform, including public funding for Supreme Court election campaigns, identification of contributors to "issue ads," and standards for self-disqualification, or recusal, of justices where the appearance of a conflict of interest exists.
BACKGROUND: Michigan Supreme Court election campaigns have become expensive over the past decade, exceeding $23 million for 9 seats on the court since 2000. Candidate-focused television issue ads, costing $10 million since 2000, are anonymous, are not reported as campaign contributions, and are not subject to campaign finance limits.
Special interest groups have been contributors to Michigan Supreme Court election campaigns. Eighty-six percent (86%) of cases heard by the Michigan Supreme Court during the decade of the 1990s had at least one contributor to at least one justice hearing the case. Michigan has no published standards for self- disqualification, or recusal, for Supreme Court justices when a case involves a justice's campaign supporters.
"The American Bar Association recommends that states that elect their Supreme Court justices in competitive elections should provide full public funding for those campaigns. This allow candidates to have financially viable campaigns without having to solicit support from special interests."
Michigan has a State Campaign Fund that could easily provide funding for Supreme Court campaigns.
LIWDA is strongly in favor of Michigan Supreme Court election reform for the reasons listed below:
We depend on fair and impartial courts to protect our rights and uphold the Constitution. Our shared belief in equal justice for all is fundamental to our democracy.
Supreme Court justices should be independent to administer justice according to the rule of law "without fear or favor."
Justices should not be forced to solicit campaign contributions from special interest groups to finance their election campaigns, but should have public funding.
Michigan Supreme Court election reform should include:
Public funding of Michigan Supreme Court election campaigns, with reasonable limits.
Public record identification of contributors to candidate-focused television "issue ads."
Published standards for self-disqualification, or recusal, for Michigan Supreme Court justices when a case involves a contributor to his/her election campaign.
We strongly urge you to support Michigan Supreme Court election reform. You can take action by:
Writing a letter to the editor of your local newspaper
Writing or emailing your State Senator and/or Representative asking her/him to support Supreme Court election reform
Information summarized from "Courting Trouble: A Forum About Threats to a Fair, Open, and Independent Michigan Supreme Court," sponsored by the League of Women Voters, Michigan Campaign Finance Network, Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council, and the Traverse City Record-Eagle, held Thursday, October 25, 2007, at the Oleson Center, Northwestern Michigan College in Traverse City, Michigan.