From Belleville News Democrat

Mar. 26, 2005

Poll: Politics influence judges
Results may reflect local judicial race
BY BRIAN BRUEGGEMANN
News-Democrat

Observers warned that the $9 million fray between Lloyd Karmeier and Gordon Maag for a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court would give the judiciary a black eye, and now there's evidence to support that.
A new poll suggests that about 85 percent of Illinois voters believe the state's judges are influenced by campaign contributors, political party leaders and interest groups.
Meanwhile, the state Supreme Court's chief justice called a meeting this week to discuss whether the judicial election system needs to be changed.
Karmeier, a Republican from Washington County, defeated Maag, a Democrat from Madison County, in the Nov. 2 election for a seat on the high court from the 5th District, which covers Southern Illinois. Along the way, their campaigns set a national record for spending on a state Supreme Court race.
Cindi Canary, director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, one of two groups that commissioned the poll, called the spending a national embarrassment.
"More than $9 million was spent in the 5th District, and most of it came from businesses and trial lawyers with a potential financial stake in cases before the state's highest court," Canary said. "As a result, the people of Illinois are questioning the fairness of the state's judicial system."
The Survey Research Office of the Center for State Policy and Leadership at the University of Illinois at Springfield conducted the poll of 747 registered voters statewide in December and January.
Mike Lawrence, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, which also commissioned the poll, said: "When only half of those polled think 'fair and impartial' is a good way to describe our judges and only 55 percent were willing to describe judges as 'honest and trustworthy,' we have a problem. Before more damage is done, the judiciary and members of the General Assembly should act to correct it."
Canary's group has proposed a limit on donations to judicial campaigns. Currently, there is no limit. Business groups bankrolled Karmeier's campaign, while plaintiff lawyers and unions supported Maag with roughly equal donations.
The state Supreme Court's Chief Justice, Mary Ann McMorrow, called a meeting this week with the court, leaders of bar associations in the state and reform groups. Court spokesman Joe Tybor said the meeting was called in recognition that the judicial election system may need change.
Tybor said the purpose of the meeting was to "discuss ways to maintain the independence of the judiciary and issues involving the tone of judicial campaigns, the financing of judicial campaigns, and matters like that." He said that although no specific changes were endorsed by the court, a future step would likely be to invite members of the General Assembly to a meeting.
Any change in the election process would have to be approved by the state legislature and governor.
Also this week, plaintiff attorneys in a lawsuit against State Farm Insurance renewed their argument that Karmeier should recuse himself from the Supreme Court's review of a $1.05 billion judgment in a class action against the company, which is a financial supporter of groups that donated heavily to Karmeier.
Ed Murnane, president of one of those groups, the Illinois Civil Justice League, said that argument would prohibit most judges from hearing most cases.
"You can carry this to an extreme," Murnane said, adding: "To suggest that a judge should be disqualified or not involved in any case based on that is insulting to the entire judiciary."
Contact Brian Brueggemann at bbrueggemann@bnd.com or 692-9481.