03/07/03

Columbus - For the first time since 1912, the state's political heavyweights gathered yesterday to discuss monumental changes in the way Ohioans elect Supreme Court justices.

Prompted by wild spending and vicious attacks on Supreme Court candidates in the last two elections, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Moyer called the conference in an attempt to heal the national black eye the state has earned for the rough-and-tumble campaigns.

A diverse group of 35 representatives from labor, business, the political parties, judicial and bar associations and grassroots organizations didn't reach a consensus, but they did agree that a transformation is necessary.

Hours of lively discussion and some verbal sparring eventually prompted an eruption from Moyer, who has been pushing for change since the 2000 election. Moyer favors a system in which the governor would appoint candidates who would later require citizens' votes to be retained.

"No one is talking about this being a good-old-boy system," Moyer said. "We would not be giving the governor unbridled authority, but would be putting some controls on that."

By day's end, many of the participants agreed to form work groups to examine: qualifications and terms of judges; potential for public financing of campaigns; the need for independent special interest groups to disclose donors; and the ability of candidates to respond to attacks.

The daylong forum titled "Judicial Impartiality: The Next Steps," was the first forum to discuss the judiciary since the state's last constitutional convention in 1912. Moyer organized the forum after unsuccessful attempts to coax the General Assembly to react to the spiraling costs to candidates and the rise of interest groups' influence.

Any recommended changes would be presented to the legislature, and Moyer said he hopes that legislation could be passed by the end of this year, although nothing would be implemented immediately. The work groups could begin next month, he said.

"Whatever changes we make should not be effective until after 2004," Moyer said. "That would take out any suggestion that this has to do with anybody on the Supreme Court who is running next year."

More than $20 million was spent on the last two elections for the Ohio Supreme Court. The races were muddied by so-called advocacy organizations that ran advertisements attacking candidates. Half of all television advertising in the nation's state supreme court races was spent in Ohio last year, said Roy Schotland, a law professor at Georgetown University and featured speaker yesterday.

Much of the group's discussion centered on changing the election of Supreme Court justices to a system in which candidates would be recommended by a committee and appointed by the governor. That judge would have to win votes later to be retained.

Judges are now elected by nonpartisan ballot. Ohioans have twice turned down calls for merit system elections - the last in 1987 - and about half of the participants yesterday still don't like the idea.

"If the point is to remove politics, it is ironic that we would do it by letting politicians pick judges rather than see something like a lengthening of terms," said Republican political consultant Curt Steiner.

Democratic political consultant Dale Butland said any changes must be sold carefully to the public.

"The problem with merit selection is, you might have alienation from the voters who will view very suspiciously the taking of power from them," Butland said.

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

tcbrown@plaind.com, 1-800-228-8272