North Carolina's Public Financing of Judicial Campaigns: A Preliminary Analysis

Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, The, Summer 2005 by Bend, Doug

INTRODUCTION

Judicial elections are held in thirty-nine states.1 These campaigns are partially financed with contributions from lawyers, law firms, and corporations.2 A conflict of interest often exists when judges later hear cases from the same individuals and corporations who donated to their campaigns and are likely to donate to their future campaigns.3 Concerns over the ability of judges to be neutral after receiving campaign donations have increased in recent years as the amount of money spent on judicial campaigns has grown exponentially.4 Various reform proposals have been made to address this conflict of interest and to restore confidence in judicial elections. This Note focuses on North Carolina's attempt to deal with this issue by providing public financing for judicial elections for its top two courts.

Part I offers a brief overview of the law providing public funding of some judges in North Carolina. Part II examines the preliminary effectiveness of North Carolina's law and the financing alternatives for this type of system. Lastly, Part III considers whether other states should implement public financing for judicial candidates.

This Note demonstrates that while there may be characteristics of North Carolina's public financing system that have proven to be unsuccessful, public financing of judicial campaigns is a remedy that should be pursued to remove potential conflicts of interest. Although the budget crises facing many states may make the adoption of a plan similar to North Carolina's financially impracticable, states should strongly consider funding a pilot project or forming a commission to determine if public financing of judicial candidates or another reform proposal is desirable for the particular political, cultural, and fiscal dynamics of their state.

I. NORTH CAROLINA'S PUBLIC FINANCING OF SOME JUDICIAL ELECTIONS

Almost all states use some form of election to choose their judges.5 This section outlines some of the problems inherent in the election of judges and how North Carolina is attempting to address these problems by publicly financing the campaigns of some judicial elections. The section also provides a preliminary analysis of the effectiveness of the law.

A number of concerns exist regarding judges raising money for elections. Primarily, there is a fear of corruption or, at the very least, the appearance of corruption.6 In addition, the prospect of having to raise money or independently fund a judicial campaign may deter qualified candidates.7 This section details the public financing system that North Carolina implemented to address these concerns, and provides a preliminary analysis of the effectiveness of the law.

On October 10, 2002, North Carolina Governor Mike Easley signed into law Senate Bill 1054, entitled "The North Carolina Judicial Campaign Reform Act."8 The legislation provides public funding to judicial candidates for its two highest courts, the North Carolina Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.9 Participation in the program is not mandatory and candidates can instead fund their campaign using personal funds or money from contributions. However, if judicial candidates do decide to participate in the program, they have to file a declaration with the North Carolina Board of Elections that they intend to do so.10 For this declaration to be valid, the candidate cannot have raised or expended more than $10,000 after the beginning of the year before the election.11

After candidates make this declaration, they must raise a minimum in qualifying contributions of thirty times the filing fee requirement.12 However, during the primary season, a candidate can raise and spend as much as sixty times the filing fee and still be eligible for the program.13 For the 2004 election, a North Carolina Supreme Court candidate had to raise a minimum of $34,590 to qualify for public funding during the general election, but could raise a maximum of $69,180 to spend during the primary.14 A candidate for the North Carolina Court of Appeals had to raise a minimum of $33,150 to receive public funding during the general election, but could have raised as much as $66,300 for the primary.15 To meet the minimum fundraising requirements, candidates are allowed to contribute up to $1000 of their own money and the same amount from "each member of that candidate's family consisting of spouse, parent, child, brother and sister."16 In addition, candidates that accept public funding cannot accept donations from political action or party committees.17

A candidate must follow several requirements in raising contributions to meet the minimum amount: Each contribution must be between $10 and $500; the contribution must be from a North Carolina registered voter, in the form of a check or money order (no cash); and a candidate must have a total of at least 350 contributors.18 In addition, these funds must be raised between September 1st in the year before the election and the day of the primary.19 Accordingly, the qualifying period for receiving these contributions during the 2004 election began on September 1, 2003, and ended on the day of the primary, July 20, 2004.20