Texas is one of only a few states that elects judges in partisan elections. It has been suggested that perhaps this is not an appropriate way to choose judges, given the nature of their job. There are many problems that could occur when citizens elect judges in partisan elections, including campaign contributions, lack of minority representation on the bench, perceptions of fairness, and lack of knowledge on the part of the voters.
A partisan election is one where candidates are listed on the ballot with indication of their political party. Then Texas voters choose who they think is best to elect as their judge. Partisanship does not belong in the courts, and judges should be chosen on their virtues. Texas is one of very few states that select their judges by this method. Every judge must pick a party and face the voters. This means that judges occasionally have to campaign for reelection, raise money, and appear on the ballot. Like other elected officials, they rely on the knowledgeable judgment of the voters to keep them in office.
Many
…show more content…
The Texas Supreme Court has been the subject of multiple media reports looking into the influence of judicial campaign donors. There are many different cases when a contributor would donate a large amount of money to a judge in order to have them elected and they would overturn a case that was going on against the contributor and their business or company. This argues that partisan elections lead to more campaign contributions and increased partisanship among judges. These problems may be the reason why several states have abandoned the idea of partisan judicial elections in recent decades. Only six states still elect judges in partisan races, including Texas, Alabama, Illinois, Louisiana, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. “All of these states are among the top ten in total judicial campaign contributions from 2000 to 2010”
Despite the overwhelming critics, Texas remains one of several states that keep supporting the concept of partisan judicial elections, where voters cast a straight-ticket vote. In fact, electing judges by the public leads to a number of ethical problems which necessarily require compromise between judicial integrity and independence. Most of the allegations of wrong-doing have caused a number of professional and citizen groups to become disaffected with the existing system.
The principles, which define the work of juridical branch, are relevant nowadays, as they have proved their effectiveness and managed to gain confidence of population. Texas juridical branch is complex and confusing. According to the principles of the Texas Constitution, six types of courts are established, some of which have simultaneous or overlapping jurisdictions. In accordance with the Texas Constitution of 1876, two high courts were established. In addition, in the traditions of Jacksonian Democracy, all the judges in Texas courts should be ready to compete with electoral politics and take their positions according to the results of partisan elections. This democratic principle of fair elections and respect to the votes of citizens is still applied in the juridical branch of Texas
The people of Texas are diverse and carry their “big can-do attitudes and accents” (Pearson); making Texas a bigger than life state. The political culture of Texas is impacted by two different subgroups of individualistic and traditionalistic characteristics. The combination of traditionalism and individualism has had a huge impact on the state and Texas’ seven different constitutions. The shift in power between 1827 and 1876 has impacted the political diversity Texas has today. Looking at the specifics of these subcultures, the traditionalists believe government should benefit the wealthy and powerful, and that government services must be limited.
In conclusion, partisan elections are hindering the election process for judges. The cost of partisan elections is more money than nonpartisan elections. partisan elections are more likely to lead to straight ticket voting, which can cause mindless voting or flawed voting. Partisan elections lead to more campaign contributions and can cause constituencies to interfere. Finally, partisan elections do not equally represent the population. Therefore, partisan elections are inferring and hinder the Texas judge positions more than nonpartisan
The political future of Texas has been widely debated since the 2012 election of President Bush. Barack Obama, since the state has always played a significant role in impacting national elections. Nationally, there was uneven support among minority voters in favor of the president and Democrats, and as a result there has been an increasing interest in the Hispanic population growth in Texas (Lawrence.) The speculation regards how the changing complexion of Texas voters will influence the political process, with political pundits broadly predicting that since the Latino population typically votes for Democrats, there is a possibility that Texas will eventually become a blue state.... ...
Texas politics is an interesting ecosystem of power, rules and regulations. Of course, in typical Texas fashion, most of the politics we engage in we do our own way. From governors who stay in office for a decade to our extremely diverse demographics, Texas is extremely unique. This uniqueness of course comes with its critics, benefits, and downsides. This is particularly true with the Texas Court system compared to both the federal courts and many other states.
In William Hudson’s book, American Democracy in Peril, he writes about different “challenges” that play a vital role in shaping the future of the United States. One is the problem of the “imperial judiciary”. Hudson defines its as that the justice system in the United States has become so powerful that it is answering and deciding upon important policy questions, questions that probably should be answered by our democratic legislatures. Instead of having debates in which everyone’s voices are heard and are considered in final decision-making process, a democratic-like process; we have a single judge or a small group of judges making decisions that effect millions of citizens, an “undemocratic” process. Hudson personally believes the current state of judicialized politics is harming policy decisions in Americans. According to him, the judicial branch is the “least democratic branch”, and ...
Political Divide in the United States The political divide in the United States is very bad. The two main political parties are the democrats and the republicans. The two parties dislike each other and each other's views. Abortion is something that has been talked about a lot, some people find it good and others find it as a bad thing. Health care is another issue that is controversial. Another big issue is illegal immigration. The death penalty and euthanasia are also reasons the government is divided. The topic of the right to bear arms is also very controversial, especially with all the murders and riots going on. Global warming, even though it does not seem very political, is a topic that comes up a lot in political speeches and events. And lastly, the separation of church and state is another topic that gets in heated discussions in politics. Not all of these seem like they are political, but they have been made into be, even though they should not have, the United States is divided over them. The political parties have caused the country to be divided. Democrats and Republicans, also known as liberals and conservatives, most people do
With any decision, both parties (republican and democratic) campaign over the state to gain support from voters to increase their chances of being elected to the office that they desire. When voting most voters arrive at polling stations to vote, first for instance, they can be given a paper ballot on which they will select their choices and which later will be checked by hand; second they can be given a paper ballot on which they will select their choices with the assistance of a voting machine; or thirdly they can be given a sheet of paper with a numerical access code. Texans share a lot of the same essential needs of voting and nonvoting as other Americans. The republican party remains undefeated after a decade that saw fights over legislature redistricting, bitter and commonly intense campaigning around both inside and between the parties, continuously expensive battling up and down the ballot. In 2002, Republican competitors cleared all statewide races and took control of both houses of the Texas legislature, viably assuming the organizations of powers. The resulting year the legislative gathering returned to the distribution of districts for the U.S. House of Representatives the accomplishment of that offensive is seen inside the progressive changes in the delegations that are represented in the features of The Texas Delegation to the united states House of Representatives.
an "Outlaw" to the Whole Legal System in America?” FAQ on US Judicial and Legal Corruption.
Texas politics can be interpreted as a very difficult and complicated institution. Its political democracy can be construed to fall under the mixture of two very distinct theoretical approaches. These models include elitism and pluralism. Elitism is the belief that individuals who derive power from leadership positions from large organizations and have great financial wealth can monopolize and influence important policy decisions. Pluralism is the theory that democracy can be achieved through competition among multiple interest groups. While many can argue that these two theories do not coincide with another, it can be noted otherwise. In this essay, elitism and pluralism will be discussed on how they are both visible in Texas democracy.
Professional lobbyists investigate and examine legislation or dogmatic proposals, are present at congressional hearings, and teach government officials and company officers on imperative issues. Lobbyists in addition work to transform public opinion all the way through advertising campaigns or by controlling opinion leaders. There are approximately 30,000 recorded lobbyists, other than that that does not comprise the public relations experts, marketers, support personnel, pollsters, and others who support their work. The majority lobbyists are hard–working professionals who comprehend how to find the way the political process works, gain access to lawmakers and main executive–branch officials, and construct a strategy to accomplish their legislative objectives.... ...
There are many steps in running for president. Running for president is said to be one of the longest campaigns. Running for President consists of mainly two different parties and which consist of: the presidential primary campaign and the general electoral campaign that follow the party’s national convention. Generally both campaigns take place within the first 10 months of the election year. The primary campaign was mainly used for opening the nomination process to ordinary party members and to delay and postpone the influence of party bosses. During this time there is a process where the candidates go through a “beauty contest” where they are competing for popular votes; however the “popular” votes do not have
The topic I have chosen is gerrymandering. Before getting too deep into this paper, I’d like to take this time to explain what gerrymandering is. To gerrymander is to redraw and resize electoral voting districts across a state. This is done to ensure that the political party that has control of the state can keep control by distributing voters in a manner that alters the people’s representation.
If you are going to run for President it needs to be done equally, whether it is in our neighborhoods, financially, or even the justice system. Every four years our country undergo a process called the presidential Election, and we the citizens of America vote and choose who we think it’s the right candidate to run our country. I choose these to because they are the most popular people that we are talking about right now. Donald Trump a candidate for the Republican Party that has no political background that is a successful business man and Hillary Clinton a Candidate representing the Democratic Party that has more experience in the political background with being secretary of State which was appointed by former President Barack Obama. Both people have strong and different political views.