News

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Commission Announces Recommendations to Reform Judicial Campaigns

News Article

April 16, 1998

PHILADELPHIA, April 16, 1998 – Eight recommendations designed to cap the skyrocketing cost of running for judicial seats in Pennsylvania were announced by James F. Mundy, Esq., chair of the Supreme Court's Special Commission to Limit Campaign Expenditures, during a press conference today at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts. This past September the Pennsylvania Supreme Court created the Special Commission to determine if public perception of judicial elections had caused a loss of respect for the judiciary and, if so, what, if anything, might be done by the Supreme Court to improve this problem. "The Commission is extremely pleased to have been of service to the Supreme Court," said Mundy. "We look forward to the opportunity to be of continued assistance to the Court in its efforts to reform judicial campaigns and increase public trust and confidence in the judiciary as a whole." Because the Commission was created by the Supreme Court, the group's recommendations focus on possible solutions which could be implemented by the Supreme Court by virtue of its power to modify the Code of Judicial Conduct. Recommendations to the Supreme Court include: limits on judicial campaign contributions; limits on judicial campaign expenditures; mandatory recusal related to judicial campaign contributions; improved judicial campaign finance disclosure; improved public education; expedient enforcement procedures; restrictions on partisan political activity by court-appointed employees; and adoption of judicial campaign advertising guidelines. Public hearings were held by the Commission in Harrisburg, Pittsburgh, Erie, Wilkes-Barre and Philadelphia. The Commission also traveled to Ohio to meet with officials from that state's Supreme Court and members of the Ohio Bar Association; commissioned a statewide poll combining the efforts of two national pollsters; and observed a presentation by the principles of both polling groups. Results of the poll conducted in mid-January led the Commission to conclude that "changes are indeed needed in order to restore confidence in the judiciary." According to Mundy, ample anecdotal as well as empirical evidence supports the Commission's finding that Pennsylvanians believe there are serious problems connected with judicial elections. He further stated, "these problems are of such magnitude that they have caused an erosion in public confidence, not only in judicial elections but also in the integrity of the courts as well." While many Pennsylvanians believe the judicial election system should be reformed, particularly with respect to contributions, "fortunately, also by overwhelming numbers, they believe these changes as they pertain to judicial elections will work," the report states.