Adding party designation to judicial candidates receives opposition

(The Center Square) – Judges, attorneys and voter rights group all oppose a bill in the Ohio House that requires some judicial candidates to run for office with a party affiliation. Others, though, believe the more voters know, the better.

House Bill 149 requires candidates for the Ohio Supreme Court or the court of appeals nominated in a primary election to appear on the general election ballot with a political party designation. Similar legislation received a hearing Tuesday in the Senate.

Currently, judicial candidates are nominated in party primaries, as most other candidates for any elected office, but do not list party affiliation in November.

“Party identification is information the voters seek, and providing it would lead to more voter-engagement on the general election ballot for Ohio judges,” Robert Alt, president and CEO of The Buckeye Institute, testified Thursday before the House Government Oversight Committee. “To my knowledge, Ohio is the only state in the nation that holds a partisan primary and a general election that isn’t nonpartisan but pretends to be by failing to provide party information to the voter.”

The Ohio Judicial Conference, which calls itself the voice of Ohio judges and represents the interests of 723 judges in the state, believes the idea does not give voters an accurate sense of candidates.

“Judges certainly would like to see voters have as much information as possible regarding judicial candidates, but HB 149 does not give voters a complete, or even an accurate, picture of candidates before them,” said Paul Pfeifer, executive director of the Ohio Judicial Conference.

Pfiefer also said Ohio’s unique system of partisan primaries and nonpartisan general elections is not perfect, but moving to fully partisan elections is a step in the wrong direction.

“I think we also need to pay attention to the distinction between partisan elections and a partisan judiciary,” Pfiefer said. “Interested parties can debate back and forth over the merits of partisan or nonpartisan election of judges. But I think all can agree that we do not want a partisan judiciary, or for judges to act and make their decisions in a partisan manner.”

The House Government Oversight Committee also held its first hearing on a bill that would alter the state’s campaign finance law by removing restrictions on corporations and labor organizations making political contributions or expenditures after those restrictions were ruled unconstitutional.

The bill also expands the definition of a political contributing entity (PCE) and requires PCEs to report the sources of all donations it uses in its general fund to make expenditures. That, according to bill sponsor Rep. Mark Fraizer, R-Newark, provides more transparency in Ohio’s elections.