Judicial 'elections' need to to be overhauled

Here's a bit of election-related trivia for you: All eight Yakima County Superior Court positions are up for election this year and seven of them will get new terms without a single vote being cast for or against them.

That's because no one filed to run against them and in Washington's quirky, indulgent way of electing judges, they get free passes to full four-year terms. In fact, they were issued "certificates of election" on June 12 after the candidate filing period ended.

For them, there is no primary election Aug. 19, much less a general election in November. Of course, one might wonder why they're called certificates of "election" if no votes for them.

But hold on! There is one open seat on the county Superior Court bench on the Aug. 19 primary ballot. Yakima attorneys David Elofson and Rob Lawrence-Berrey are vying for the seat vacated by retirement of Bob Hackett. But even that one has a somewhat strange twist: Whoever gets a majority of votes in the primary (50 percent-plus) is elected. There is no general election for the position unless a write-in petition is filed within 10 days after the primary.

The only reason the Elofson - Lawrence-Berrey race is on the ballot is because it's an open seat and two filed for it. Sitting Superior Court judges are rarely challenged -- witness the seven unopposed and automatically renewed judges.

Washington has several different ways of electing (or renewing) judges, and for the life of us we can't figure out why. It's a hodgepodge of state law and constitutional authorization.

Nick Handy, director of elections in the Washington secretary of state's office, outlined the technical reason for the curious way of electing Superior Court judges -- Article IV, Section 29 of the state Constitution, which was changed by a voter-approved amendment in the 1966 statewide general election. It provides:

* If only one candidate files, that candidate is immediately issued a certificate of election in counties with more than 100,000 registered voters. In counties with fewer than 100,000 voters, the candidate will appear in the primary and general election.

* If two candidates file, the candidate who has the majority of votes in the primary is immediately issued a certificate of election and does not appear in the general election.

* If more than three candidates file, and if one candidate gets a majority in the primary, that candidate is issued a certificate of election and does not appear in the general election.

* If more than three candidates file, and one candidate does not get a majority in the primary, then the top two vote-getters proceed to the general election.

According to state election officials, the amendment apparently was driven in part by the hassle of requiring counties to list many unopposed races on the ballot. King County, for example, has 53 Superior Court judge positions, most of which are uncontested every four years. Thus, if King County were required to list every unopposed race on the primary and general election ballot, King County voters would be faced with pages of unopposed races.

Well, so what? King County's problems shouldn't always drive life as we know it in the rest of the state.

Actually, it would appear that in 1966 Superior Court judges and lawyers were a pretty strong lobby to get this pampered treatment on the ballot -- and then sell it to the voters.

As Secretary of State Sam Reed rightly points out, the automatic election -- again we wonder how anyone can be "automatically" elected without a vote being cast -- even precludes write-in campaigns. He's of the opinion that all issues and contests should be decided in the general election when the voter turnout is usually higher. We agree.

Judges are supposed to be elected in this state, and automatic certificates of election flies in the face of that mandate. Judges should be elected by a uniform, simplified method across the board.

Cynics might say that judicial elections became so convoluted over the years because judges and lawyers were involved in setting up the procedures. But as we see this strange system at play locally and statewide this year, it's a good reminder for state legislators to streamline the judicial election process with new legislation and most likely another proposed constitutional amendment for voter perusal.

Until there's a uniform election system, let's not pretend that anyone is "elected" just because they filed for the office and no other attorney wanted to take them on (and subsequently wind up arguing cases in their courtrooms if they lose.)

Superior Court races in particular need some attention. District and municipal court elections offer good models.

* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins, Bill Lee and Karen Troianello.

How it works

Here's a breakdown of the present tangle (available at www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf/2006_Judicial_Offices_Appearing_on_the_Ballot4-06.pdf)

n Supreme Court and Courts of Appeals: If one person files, he or she is on both the primary and general election ballot.

If two file, then the top vote-getter in the primary advances alone to the general election. That's the situation on the Aug. 19 ballot when incumbent state Supreme Court Justice Mary Fairhurst is opposed by challenger Michael Bond. After a statewide vote, only one will advance to the November ballot.

If three or more file, there's a runoff between the top two vote-getters if none of the three get a majority (50 percent plus) in the primary.

n County District Court: If one person files, he or she goes directly to the general election ballot; if two file, both also advance directly to the general, If three or more file the top two vote-getters advance to the general election, unless one gets a majority in the primary.

n Municipal Court: If one or two candidates file, there is no primary and one or both advance to the general. If three or more file, the top two vote-getters in the primary advance to the general election. with the top vote getter appearing first on the ballot.

• The Classified Marketplace
• • Announcements
  • Public Notices
  • Legal Notices
  • Merchandise
  • Yard Sales
  • Animals
  • Finance

• Newspaper Ads
  View All