|
archived: 1 - 7 Oct, 2006 Back Next UPDATED: OCTOBER 3, 2006 TAKE TWO VOTES AND CALL TPJ …… TPJ has received a number of requests for our recommendations for judicial races in North Carolina. Our recommendations follow. In 2006, Democrats have a rare opportunity to stop the ever growing domination of the State judiciary by the Republican Party. With no national races or state executive branch races on the November ballot, turnout will be small. Some estimates are as low as 38%. The question is how small. Small turnouts can produce untoward results. REMIND EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO VOTE. If Democrats can, comparatively, get their voters out to the polls TPJ recommends that every Democrat commit to taking two voters to the polls. It seems too simple, but with a very small turn out, it can make the difference between victory and defeat. So, take two people to the polls and call TPJ to celebrate North Carolina courts we can all be proud of. A number of TPJ readers ask if they can cut and paste the recommendations below and email them to their friends. Readers are more than welcome to do so, and no prior permission from TPJ is required. In fact, consistent with your views, we URGE readers to forward TPJ’s recommendations to everyone in North Carolina for whom you have an email address. TPJ’s CRITERIA A Justice of the State Supreme Court is a critical selection. The NC Supreme Court is the highest court in North Carolina. This Court ultimately interprets the law of North Carolina as it will be applied in all other courts and administrative agencies in the State. A Justice should have a particularly intimate knowledge of the law and personal attributes to match the responsibilities of sitting on this Court. First, an intimate knowledge of the extensive body of law is essential. That knowledge comes not only from a Justice’s legal background, but from a broad range of experience, including trial and appellate court experience. Second, and perhaps most importantly, a Justice should have the ability to envision the application of law as it effects citizens throughout the State. Third, a Justice of Supreme Court must be able to balance the often competing forces in legal disputes with a commitment to balancing the application of the law to fashion a system of justice that is fundamentally fair to all citizens. Findings these attributes is no small feat. We believe that the Democratic Party has, with one exception¸ fielded the best qualified candidates for the Supreme Court and Court of appeals in recent history. We cannot, under any circumstances, recommend one Democrat, but TPJ endorses the Republican in the race as discussed below. THE SUPREME COURT Chief Justice
Sarah Parker Sarah Parker is the choice for Democrats here. Parker is currently Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and has performed with distinction. Chief Justice Parker has served as an appellate judge for almost twenty-two years. She has an unblemished record as a hard-working, fair-minded, capable judge who has been an excellent steward of the public trust. Her 22 years of service is an invaluable asset to the Court and to the citizens of the State. Simply stated, judicial candidates do not come any better than Chief Justice Parker. Rusty Duke, her opponent, is touting his “conservative” (code speak for right wing Republicanism). Duke has no experience as an appellate court judge. The lack of appellate judicial experience is critical to this race. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints the head of the Administrative Office of the Courts that oversees all of the courts in North Carolina. Associate Justice
Rachel Lea Hunter In this race, TPJ actually recommends Republican Mark D. Martin. Justice Martin currently serves as Senior Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. He has a reputation of fairness and impartiality. He has some 14 years of judicial service, including judicial service on the Court of Appeals and as a Superior Court trial judge. All five living former Chief Justices of our Supreme Court (3 Democrats and 2 Republicans) have endorsed Justice Martin. They collectively stated, “Justice Martin is a . . . critical force in preserving the judicial integrity of our legal system.” North Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Jerry Meek has also endorsed Martin, repudiating Ms. Hunter even though she is a Democrat. In all candor, Ms. Hunter is simply not qualified for judicial service. She has expressed views that at time have bordered on bizarre and reflect a temperament that is not indicative of a judge who would be impartial. Associate Justice
Patricia Timmons-Goodson The choice for Democrats is Patricia Timmons-Goodson, the incumbent in this race. She has 21 years of experience on the bench, more judicial experience than any other candidate for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. She has also served as a prosecutor, a district court judge for 12 1/2 years and served for 8 1/2 years on the North Carolina Court of Appeals. This blend of experience would be invaluable on the State Supreme Court. She has a sterling reputation for hard work, knowledge of the law and a common sense approach to justice that is refreshing. Associate Justice
Robin Hudson Robin Hudson is the clear choice in this race. Judge Hudson has superlative qualifications in each of the areas in TPJ’s criteria (see above). Judge Hudson currently sits on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the State’s second highest court. In her current position, Judge Hudson has developed an impeccable reputation as highly knowledgeable in the law, fairness in her decisions and a very strong work ethic. Former Chief Justices Burley Mitchell, James Exum, and Henry Frye, have endorsed Judge Hudson in prose uncharacteristic for former Chief Justices: “...one of the best qualified candidates ever to run for the North Carolina Supreme Court. She is a sound legal scholar who is fair and impartial...She believes judges should apply the law, not promote their own agendas.” In addition to her current role as Judge of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, Judge Hudson has an extensive and varied background in the law, both criminal and civil:
Judge, NC Court of Appeals, 2001-present Hudson’s opponent, Judge Anne Mari Calabria has experience on the Court of Appeals. The distinctions between Judge Hudson and Calabria are stark. Judge Calabria has written a number of opinions that appear to express partisan political philosophies. Judge Hudson’s opinions reflect a judicial maturity and temperament that is forward thinking and provides fundamental fairness to all who appear in North Carolina Courts. Calabria describes her philosophy (emphasis added): I have consistently upheld our Constitution, faithfully interpreted the laws and refrained from legislating from the bench. I believe the US and NC Constitutions establish federal and state governments of limited powers. I believe the Founders intended these documents to guarantee freedom, property rights, and individual rights. I believe in judicial restraint, not judicial activism because the Constitution sets forth authorities, responsibilities, and limits on each branch of government. Judges should not legislate from the bench or substitute their own judgment for that of the other branches. The phrases highlighted are nothing more than far right Republican code speak for committing herself to the far right’s ideological agenda. Candidates for judges espousing this code speak are pledging their fealty to an ideology and not a commitment to administer justice evenly based upon the facts before them. Such ideologues have no place on North Carolina’s courts; be they Republican or Democrat. NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Judge
Robert C. “Bob” Hunter Judge Hunter has distinguished himself while on the Court of Appeals. Judge Hunter’s decisions are well written, thorough and always reflect a judicial temperament that demonstrate his even handed review of trial court proceedings. Judge Hunter also distinguishes himself by his reasoned decisions requiring trial courts to retry cases when the proceedings were not fundamentally fair to a party. Judge Hunter also brings a perspective to the Court of Appeals that is rare. Hunter served some 18 years in the General Assembly. This experience gives Hunter the unique perspective in applying the statutory law enacted by the General Assembly. Kris Bailey of Cary, North Carolina is running against Hunter. Baily has limited experience in the law and is running on a statement that demonstrates a partisan note: COMMON SENSE Judges should show a measure of humility and refrain from personal whims in decisions. Under the law, our courts should protect marriage, the family, prayer, property and our Constitution, not destroy them. More Republican code speak and a clear expression of staking out ideological positions on legal issues that may come before the Court of Appeals. Just ask yourself, would a party in a proceeding before a Judge Bailey believe they would get a fair hearing? The answer is obvious. Judge
Linda Stephens Judge Stephens wrote perhaps the best reasons for her election to the seat she now holds: “My judicial philosophy is simple. Work hard. Judge fairly. Listen impartially. Treat all parties with respect. Seek to ensure justice, one case at a time.” Well said and all of the attributes that a Judge of the Court of Appeals should demonstrate. Vote to reelect Judge Stephens. _____________________________________________ ZOUNDS!! Elon University (EUP) has released its most recent North Carolina poll. The results are fascinating and important for Democrats to understand. The poll must be viewed cautiously however. First, the EUP is a survey of adult citizens; it does discriminate for either registered voters or likely voters. Therefore, the poll’s results are not the best indicator of projected results at the ballot box in November. When asked to identify which Party they supported in the last presidential election, the survey participants responded:
The breakdown is close to Kerry’s NC vote, but is about 10% lower than Bush’s actual North Carolina results. In TPJ’s estimation, the results in other polling results probably underestimate Republican policy positions to some degree. Second, EUP does not provide data on subgroups: men, women; White, Black, Hispanic, etc. The margin of error for the EUP is 3.92%, which is not unreasonably high. Bush The mainstream media is focusing on Bush’s approval/disapproval ratings in NC. Consistent with national poll results, Bush is experiencing a bounce in North Carolina. EUP pegs Bush’s approval rating at 45.2%, disapproval at 48.5%. Bush’s approval rating is up about 4% since February of this year. These results are constant with those of Survey USA; approve 45%, disapprove 51%. Nationally, Bush has experienced a bounce of 6% to 7% since May 2006. EUP’s findings are consistent with that known trend as well. The strength of Bush’s support in NC is quite surprising. Those who strongly approve of Bush’s performance as president is 15.9% while those who strongly disapprove of Bush’s performance is 31.1%, a ratio of almost 2 to 1.
For Democrats, the intensity of disapproval suggests two questions. First, will the ratio of intensity between those who strongly approve or disapprove actually bring greater numbers of Democrats to the polls? The EUP poll questions do not provide an answer to that question. Second, does the 2 to 1 ratio in intensity effect down ballot races; Congressional contests and NC General Assembly races? EUP’s results suggest Bush’s weakness does effect down ballot contests. When asked if support of Bush would influence their vote in Congressional, North Carolinians answered:
EUP does not provide the subsets for Democrats, Republicans and Independents. The results roughly correlate to the percentages for Party Affiliation in Survey USA’s most recent poll of registered voters, 73% either Republican or Democrat and 20% Independent.
When asked specifically if voters were willing to make a change in their Congressman, EUP found that 54.5% were either willing to consider voting against the incumbent or were planning to vote for the challenger. NC Democrats are seriously contesting only two Republican Congressional districts; the 8th and 11th. While EUP does not provide the geographical breakdown of the answers for this question or Party Affiliation, the EUP results suggest that the public is willing to consider change.
TPJ assesses that Bush’s popularity does not help Republicans in North Carolina and the strength of opposition provides fertile ground for Democrats. State Issues EUP asked North Carolinians to rank the issues most important to the State.
In North Carolina the two top issues are education and the economy; nationally the top two issues are the occupation of Iraq and terrorism. These responses bode well for Democrats in the General Assembly who will run on a platform of Education, Jobs and Health Care. TPJ anticipates Republicans to run a statewide campaign featuring the issues of Democratic Party corruption (Jim Black), taxes (the General Assembly’s spending rate) and immigration. At this juncture, the only issue that appears ripe for Republicans is immigration. Several conclusions may not be readily apparent:
Democrats must realize that immigration is important to our citizens and will have to address this issue.
TPJ believes that the Democratic Party campaign platform of education, jobs and health care is well positioned to attract voters. We believe that Democrats are better positioned on the issue important to North Carolinians than Republicans. National Issues The North Carolina responses were quite different than responses when asked the most important issue facing the United States. TPJ compares the responses in the chart below:
EUP asked respondents issue by issue whether an issue would be important in their vote for Congressional candidates; “I'm going to read you a list of issues and I'd like for you to tell me whether the issue [will or will not] influence your vote choice for Congress, or if you have even thought about the issue in making your choice?” The response serves as a barometer of intensity on each particular issue. Below, TPJ charts the responses of those who indicated that the issue will play a part in “influencing” their vote. Consistent with the raking of the most important issue, above, the issues of terrorism and Iraq rank very high, closely followed by immigration, health care costs. Of note, the “economy” as an issue ranked highest. For Democrats, this suggests that the economy is a major concern to voters even though it was 4th in national and State issues. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||