WHY THIS YEAR’S ELECTIONS DESERVE YOUR ATTENTION

         Off year elections like those in the coming months are notorious for little excitement and low voter turnout.  Most potential voters are more focused on the early stages of the 2016 presidential primary circus than the slim offerings on this year’s ballot.  This is a shame because circumstances have given Pennsylvania voters an unusual three openings on the critically important Supreme Court. 

         What happens in the May primary and November general election will shape our Supreme Court for decades to come.  Those who care about the rights of women, workers, patients and plaintiffs in civil law suits (among many others) should be completing their due diligence on the Supreme Court Candidates and urging their families, friends and associates to do the same and to show up on election day.

         What is to be done to vet those running for the Supreme Court? By my count there are thirteen candidates, all of whom are able to cross file on both ballets in the primary, running for the three openings.  Rules of judicial conduct prohibit candidates from discussing specific issues.  Commercials are often misleading and funded by interest groups seeking to elect a Justice or two sympathetic to their cause.  Clearly research is in order to uncover the most deserving candidates.

         My plan is to first check the Pennsylvania Bar Association and Allegheny County Bar Association recommendations, published earlier this year.  These evaluations are readily available on Goggle and pavotesmart.com. 

         The PBA evaluation process is conducted by highly qualified lawyers who: “seek to give voters guidance by only recommending potential candidates who have the legal ability, experience, integrity and temperament needed to provide satisfactory or outstanding performance as judges on our appellate courts.”  The PBA Evaluation Commission also publishes a summary of its findings on each candidate as well as the questionnaire submitted by each candidate, to give the voter more than just a rating.  This is most useful information you are likely to find in considering your choices.

         I also will review the Allegheny County evaluations because, all things being equal, I will vote for a jurist from Western Pennsylvania and these ratings shed further light on these candidates.  Once I have narrowed my list I will run each selection through Wikipedia and Google to make sure I have not missed any dirty laundry.  Lastly I will call my lawyer friends in Allegheny County who have interacted professionally with the individuals I have selected, to make sure my judgment is sound.

         I have found that voting for judicial candidates is like stock picking. Do not listen to the guy at the bar and do your homework.  In a low turnout election your vote is more likely to make a difference.