From the St. Louis Post Dispatch

Lawyer's deep pockets in Ill. judicial race raise hackles
By Kevin McDermott and Kathleen Haughney
POST-DISPATCH SPRINGFIELD BUREAU
01/23/2008
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — A Swansea lawyer is poised to spend more than $600,000 of her own money to win a Southern Illinois appellate court seat, potentially adding a new dimension to what critics say is the disturbing trend of high-priced judicial races.
Wealthy trial lawyer Judy Cates raised $665,814 in the last six months of 2007 in her campaign for Illinois' Fifth District Court of Appeals, according to campaign records released Tuesday. The bulk of that money — almost $660,000 — was provided in the form of loans from Cates or her self-named law firm, where she practices with her son.
Cates is fighting for the Democratic nomination Feb. 5 against incumbent Appellate Judge James Wexstten of Mount Vernon. Wexstten raised $219,881 in cash and services in the last half of last year from varied business, labor and law firm sources, according to the new records.
The winner of the Democratic primary contest for the seat goes on to the Nov. 4 general election. No Republican is currently running.
Cates says her self-financing is an antidote to the special interest concerns that have plagued Illinois judicial elections — especially a 2004 race for a Southern Illinois Supreme Court seat where the two candidates raised a national record combined total of $9 million from opposing special interests that lined up on opposite sides of the contest.
Cates "didn't want to owe anybody," said her campaign manager, Marty Morris. "She's not going to have to answer to anybody."
But Wexstten's camp argues that a judicial campaign funded almost entirely by the candidate presents concerns as serious as those of a campaign funded by special interests.
"Do you want to live in a democracy in which the only people who can get elected are the ones rich enough to write a check?" asked Wexstten spokesman Bob Miner.
He said Wexstten's donations were from "a good mix" of sources, ensuring that no one special interest could appear to have special influence.
Cindi Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform has argued for years that special interests hold too much sway over Illinois judicial elections, in which there are no limits on the amount or source of campaign donations. But she said Tuesday that Cates' opposite strategy of relying on her personal wealth also raised concerns.
"We can't expect judges to just self-finance. We completely narrow the pool of those we might elect," said Canary. She called the latest developments "a good case for public financing" of judicial elections.
In addition to the 2007 records released Tuesday, campaign data show that, this month, Wexstten has raised $203,736 and Cates has raised $18,250.