Wanna know why we love the Missouri Plan - because it is better than Michigan. Michigan has partisan elections of judges (which is what Jeff Roe, the Adam Smith Foundation and Gov. Matt Blunt want).
In Michigan they are anticipating a $20 million dollar race for a single Supreme Court position (see article below). The people donating are not seeking neutral, fair justice. They donate because they want to purchase their brand of justice. Is that what we want in Missouri?
Let's think about Enterprise Rent a Car (the folks from St. Louis who opposed the Sprint Arena (and by flawed logic, Garth Brooks)). Enterprise Rent a Car is actively engaged in the Missouri legislative process. Enterprise got sued for telling an accountant to not follow IRS regulations on how to depreciate cars. Enterprise lost and did not like the ruling (Dunn v. Enterprise). So, they tried to get it overturned in the legislature (SB 168). When that didn't work, Matt Blunt appoints Don Ross, Enterprise VP, to the appellate judicial nominating commission. For those frothing at the mouth for more partisanship in the selecting of judges - be happy. Matt Blunt is doing his best to pack the judicial commission with ultra conservative agendas. If the people of Missouri vote him back into office, like they voted Ashcroft to back-to-back terms, then he can do it.
By Stuart Frohm
11/12/2007
Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Clifford W. Taylor was the mystery speaker at today's Midland County Republican Party fundraising breakfast.
Diane Bristol, the county party's chairperson, said last week that a statewide candidate she couldn't announce was among the scheduled speakers.
Other speakers were the Rev. Keith Butler of Southfield, possible future member of the Republican National Committee; state Republican Chairman Saul Anuzis; Midlanders U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, state Sen. Tony Stamas and state Rep. John Moolenaar; and state Rep. Bill Caul of Mount Pleasant.
Caul announced that he will be a candidate for re-election. This term he had a mild stroke and was treated for prostate cancer. He represents the 99th District, which includes parts of Midland County and all of Isabella County. He is seeking his third consecutive two-year term -- the last House term the state's term limit would allow him.
Taylor said his own re-election is important to keep conservatives in the majority on the court, with the court's 4-3 split. He said he does not yet know who Democrats will nominate to run against him next year.
In Michigan, candidates for judicial seats appear on the ballot without party labels.
On Oct. 22, a statement from the Michigan Campaign Finance Network said Taylor and Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer both raised the possibility of a $20 million campaign next year when Taylor seeks a second full term on the court.
Taylor, a Flint native, was appointed to the court in August 1997 by then-governor John Engler to succeed Justice Dorothy Comstock Riley, who retired.
Taylor was elected in 1998 to fill the balance of Riley's term. Taylor was re-elected to a full eight-year term in 2000 and was elected chief justice by colleagues in January 2005.
Engler appointed him to the state Court of Appeals in 1992.
More on the Republican breakfast is planned for publication in a future edition of the Daily News.
18 comments:
Will you ever quit telling lies to yur readers?
Everyone should read the post from a couple of days ago on this blog.
http://blogccp.blogspot.com/2007/11/some-want-political-hacks-for-judges.html
When Gene Forte asked Stephen for an example of a partisan decision that was issued by one of our currently elected partisan judges, he could not name one!
Stephen Bough is a sock puppet for the most corrupt judiciary this state has ever seen. You know why the Missouri Bar doesn't want to get rid of the Missouri Plan? They don't want to take the chance that judges who rule in accordance with the law could end up replacing those whose rulings fill the pockets of corrupt attorneys.
Gene Forte presented some good information. Stephen ran away and refused to address it when the truth was presented.
Stephen...stop telling lies.
Mr. Byrne,
You are correct, I cannot identify a partisan decision. I believe the current system does not encourage partisan decisions, which is why I don't think the system should be changed.
My Southern Baptist mother told me "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." So, thanks for signing your name. I hope you will join us liars on Nov. 29th at 6:00 at the UMKC Law School for a Forum on the Misouri Non-Partisan Court Plan.
I can now add "Sock puppet to corrupt judiciary" to my resume!! Please don't tell the 4 Republicans that control the Supreme Court, including Rush Limbaugh's cousin, they are the most corrupt judiciary the state has ever seen. They might bring up the judicary the was packed by Pendergrast, or the pharamcist that was appointed judge, or . . ., oh never mind. I'm telling lies again.
Stephen...
"My Southern Baptist mother told me "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
I guess that saying would be like most others things your mother must have taught you... You only want it to apply to others. You certainly don't abide by her teachings. Most of your posts are expressing malcontent for others. The biggest problem is that you will lie while doing it.
Will your mother be at the forum? I'd like to share some of your posts with her.
Here's a post from the St. Louis Oracle from Dec. 2005
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Week marks split decision for trial lawyers
While trial lawyers representing tobacco claimants suffered a big, costly loss in Illinois this week, they solidified their control over courts in Missouri.
Media attention focused on the Illinois Supreme Court's reversal of the $10-billion judgment against Philip Morris. The high court reversed the decision of the notoriously plaintiff-friendly Madison County trial court in a 4-2 split decision. Newly elected Judge Lloyd Karmeier, a Republican, cast the deciding vote. Karmeier was elected to the court last year in a costly contest against Democrat Gordon Maag. Trial lawyers backed Maag, while business interests backed Karmeier. In Illinois, supreme court judges are elected directly by voters in partisan elections, on the same party tickets as candidates for president, governor and the like.
In contrast, under Missouri's non-partisan court plan, vacancies on the Missouri Supreme Court and three district courts of appeal are filled by appointment of the governor, whose choices are limited to three candidates nominated by an appellate judicial commission. Some trial judges, including those in St. Louis City and County, are chosen the same way. Voters periodically vote whether to retain a judge, but no Missouri judge has lost such an election in over 50 years.
But the process in Missouri is still very political. In recent years, trial lawyers representing criminal defendants and personal injury claimants have become major financial supporters of Democratic candidates. This contrasts with the long-time (though eroding) support of Big Business interests for Republican candidates. The legal interests of Big Business (especially casualty insurance companies) are diametrically opposed to the trial lawyers. (In a political context, the term "trial lawyers" does not include those attorneys who appear in the same trials defending claims against insurance companies and other businesses, even though they too are literally trial lawyers.) Republican demonization of trial lawyers' influence over Democratic
candidates reached the presidential level last year, as supporters of the Bush-Cheney ticket criticized Democratic vice-presidential nominee John Edwards for his pre-senatorial career as a trial lawyer.
Missouri’s judicial nominating commissions consist of a designated chief appellate judge plus equal numbers of attorneys elected by the bar and citizen members appointed by the governor, all in staggered terms. During the 12 years preceding the election of Republican Matt Blunt, Democratic governors appointed all of Missouri’s appellate judges and also the citizen members of the commissions. Contests for the lawyer spots are not overtly partisan, but tend to pit candidates favored by trial lawyers against candidates favored by business interests, which correlates strongly with Democrat vs. Republican. Republicans believe that Governor Blunt’s prerogative to pick conservative judges is being thwarted by nominating commissions who present the governor with exclusively Democrat and/or pro-trial lawyer choices from which to pick. Holdover citizen commissioners appointed by Blunt’s Democrat predecessor, Bob Holden, often join with lawyer commissioners who are trial lawyers to do just that. The votes of lawyer commissioners are often decisive. These dynamics raise the stakes in the bar elections for the lawyer members of the commissions.
This is the context in which this and last month’s bar elections for lawyer commissioners took place. The trial lawyers took two of three, and for the first time, women lawyers won all of the contests.
The most important seat was on the appellate judicial commission, the statewide body that nominates judges for the Missouri Supreme Court and the three district courts of appeal. Nancy Mogab won a runoff election, narrowly defeating Frank Gundlach, 1988-1753, for a seat representing eastern Missouri lawyers. Mogab represents injured workers in workers compensation claims and has long been a leader in advocacy groups for trial lawyers, whose support she enjoyed. Her late father, Charlie Mogab, was a legendary St. Louis trial lawyer. In contrast, Gundlach is a partner at a large downtown firm primarily representing business interests and is a past-president of the John Marshall Republican Club (an organization of Republican attorneys). Mogab replaces Gerard Carmody, a partner in a Clayton firm primarily representing business interests, including insurance companies and medical professionals in malpractice cases.
Lawyers in the City of St. Louis elected Mary Anne Seday to the judicial commission for the city’s circuit courts. Seday is a civil rights attorney and LGBT- and abortion-rights activist. This election culminates a 20-year effort on Seday’s part to win a seat on the commission. Her perseverence paid off this year.
Both Mogab and Seday have served on the Board of Governors of the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys and are frequent contributors to campaigns of Democrats.
Business and insurance interests arguably won only in St. Louis County, whose lawyers elected Debbie Champion. Her firm primarily represents insurance companies and other businesses. Her recent political contributions have gone mostly to Mark Smith, who unsuccessfully sought the Democratic nomination for Congress last year, but also to Republican Catherine Hanaway.
A common thread in all three contests, though, was gender politics. All three winners were recruited by the Women’s Lawyers Association of Greater St. Louis, which formally endorsed them, promoted them throughout their campaigns, and worked to get out the vote during the election period. Its efforts were encouraged by the Sue Shear Institute for Women in Public Life, a publicly funded organization based at the University of Missouri at St. Louis, which a WLA press release credits with providing early strategic advice for these campaigns. In addition, Stacey Newman, Executive Director of the Missouri Women’s Coalition, served as a campaign consultant to the three candidates and was particularly invaluable during the early stages of the Mogab campaign.
The WLA press release notes that the organization seeks “gender parity” on the judiciary in order to “reduce the severity and frequency of systemic gender discrimination and . . . improve the quality of the judiciary and the equality of justice for all litigants.”
FYI- The St. Louis Oracle is a retired attorney
Mr. Byrne -
I turn the question to you. Can you give an example of a partisan decision made by a judge who was appointed through the Missouri Plan?
Mr. Boulware...
Since you asked:
In Glass v. State (2007), the Missouri Supreme Court, citing ineffective assistance of counsel, reversed the death sentence of a man who confessed to raping and savagely beating a 13 year-old girl before choking her to death. Ordinarily, winning an appeal on those grounds requires showing that the defense counsel effectively slept through the trial. But in Glass, the Missouri justices put their near-religious opposition to the death penalty above the law and ruled that the defense’s inherently subjective decisions about which witnesses to call amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel.
In Schoemehl v. Treasurer of State (2007), the Missouri Supreme Court made it clear that it would not let the plain meaning of statutes stand in the way of its liberal agenda. The justices held that disability benefits must be paid after the beneficiary has died, despite the relevant statute’s clear language that such benefits are to be paid only “during the continuance of [the] disability.”
The Missouri court made it equally clear that it would rather play ideological favorites than consistently apply the law when the Supreme Court found in Shipley v. Cates (2006) that the state had illegally paid more than $500,000 to Planned Parenthood, it nonetheless allowed the pro-choice group to keep the money.
When it was initiated in 1940, the "Missouri Plan" was seen as a way of keeping politics and special interests out of the judicial selection process and was copied by most of the other states.
Unfortunately, the Plan’s promise has not been fulfilled. Over the years, the Commission’s secretive selection process has become increasingly controlled by the Missouri Bar Association, an organization with close ties to liberal special interest groups.
Mr. Byrne -
Simply because you (who is neither a lawyer nor a judge) disagree with a court decision does not mean it was decided on political, rather than legal, grounds. You disagree with the outcome of the case, let it go at that.
And even more absurd than your claim that the Missouri Plan is political is your solution to the (nonexistent) problem. To rid the judicial selection process of politics, you propose replacing nonpartisan appointments with partisan elections. On what planet does this make any sense?
mr. boulware...
You requested an example of a partisan decision. I presented more than one. The cases presented as partisan were not determined to be partisan by me, but by Curt Levey, General Counsel for the Committee for Justice.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22335&keywords=leftward
Therefore, your juvenile attempt to discredit the cases that I have identified as partisan, per your request, with "you’re not an attorney or judge" is moot.
I concur with Mr. Levey's analysis of those decisions.
Don't put words in my mouth. I have not suggested that partisan elections should replace the current plan. I have acknowledged that the partisan election of judges is currently in use in most of Missouri, and no one is complaining that those partisan elections have resulted in partisan decisions from the trial courts.
As you are an attorney in Kansas City, I guess you forgot about the rest of the state.
You claim the problems in Missouri Courts are "nonexistent". Just because you live in a cave doesn't mean the sun doesn't shine. Our judiciary is corrupt, you have, voluntarily or involuntarily, closed your eyes to it.
I was successfully interpreting U.S. Code (federal law) long before you left grade school. You should gain a little life experience before you attempt to nullify the opinions of someone else. As an attorney with only five years of experience, you probably spend more time regurgitating what has been shoved down your throat in school, than you have contemplating its effect on the people of Missouri.
Why don't you present us with the long list of your appellate experience? I'm not looking for a list from the inside; you know the kind of experience that you get from clerking for the Court. How many cases have you presented to the Missouri Appellate Courts?
Stephen Limbaugh did a good job of training you to be a sock puppet for the corrupt judiciary. It is no wonder that you post on a blog with Stephen Bough.
Challenge: Set aside a Saturday for a videotaped discussion on the Missouri Courts; one-on-one, in your office. I would eat you alive in such a forum.
Mr. Byrne -
I made the mistake of believing you wanted to discuss policy. Instead, you are making personal attacks. I don't have time for that. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
No Mr. Boulware...
You made the mistake of trying to discredit me and put words into my mouth.
I effectively put you into a position that required you to put up or shut up. I'm glad you chose to shut up.
And this is why we have a blog. People can read, see the strength of arguments, determine if positions are based on insults or intelligent thoughts.
I will admit (yet another) mistake. I had hoped that signing of names would stop the insulting. I was wrong.
Mr. Boulware - glad to learn that Rush Limbaugh's cousin did a great job of training you to be a sock puppet.
This is an incomplete list of folks who support the Missouri Non-Partisan Court Plan - not a one is an evil trial lawyer - all are obvious sock puppets of the judiciary.
Terrance Dunn, CEO of JE Dunn
William Berkley, president and chief executive officer of Tension Envelope Corp.;
David Frantze, a partner in the Stinson Morrison Hecker law firm;
John Bluford III, president and CEO of Truman Medical Centers;
Donald Hall Jr., president and CEO of Hallmark Cards;
Tom Bowser, president and CEO of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City;
Richard Hastings, president and CEO of Saint Luke's Health System;
Michael Chesser, chairman and CEO of Great Plains Energy;
Michael Haverty, chairman and CEO of Kansas City Southern;
Mark Ernst, chairman and CEO of H&R Block;
Mark Jorgenson, president and CEO of U.S. Bank;
Robert Kipp, chairman of Crown Center;
Robert Regnier, president of Bank of Blue Valley;
Thomas McDonnell, president and CEO of DST Systems;
Scott Smith, president of HNTB Corp.;
William Nelson, chairman of George K. Baum Asset Management;
Elizabeth Solberg, past chairwoman of the Civic Council;
Joerg Ohle, president of Bayer HealthCare, animal health division;
David Welte, general counsel, Stowers Institute and Bryan Cave law firm;
David Oliver, Berkowitz, Oliver, Williams, Shaw & Eisenbrandt law firm;
William Zollars, chairman, president and CEO of YRC Worldwide; and
Karen Pletz, president and CEO of Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences.
When corporate Republicans and Democrats agree - maybe, just maybe, they are right.
oh ya, The Missouri Bar is composed of ever lawyer in the State of Missouri. You practice law here, you are a member of the Missouri Bar. As such, every judge in the state is a member of the Missouri Bar. Since the Missouri Plan took effect, this has been so. So if the conspiracy goes to the Missouri Bar - every lawyer in the State is in on this vast right wing conspiracy. Hillary - watch out!!
What part is secretive? They take applications, after sending out notice. They do interviews of EVERYONE that applies. They send three names to the governor. Jeff Roe post on his blog the name of the applicants.
Let's compare that with Gov. Blunt. When he appointed the newest Judge in Greene County (not governed by the Missouri Plan), he wouldn't tell the press under the Sunshine Law who else was interviewed or release documents. http://blogccp.blogspot.com/2007/
10/blunt-loves-secret-selection-
of-judges.html
Now, who is keeping secrets?
Interesting comment from 2005 - timely, Mr. Byrne.
"A common thread in all three contests, though, was gender politics. All three winners were recruited by the Women’s Lawyers Association of Greater St. Louis, which formally endorsed them, promoted them throughout their campaigns, and worked to get out the vote during the election period."
First you give them the right to vote, then they become lawyers, then judges!! What's next an equal representation - a full 50%!?!? What's an angry white male to do? This is out of control! I'm going to rush off and tell my daughter to learn to be more submissive.
Stephen...
At least you're consistent!
With the exception of Terrance Dunn, all of those on the list sent the Governor a letter asking him to oppose initiative petitions.
http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/7458
So a group of civic leaders sent a letter to the Governor asking him to be a Democrat. That's not news. If the people of Missouri wanted a Democrat Governor, they would have voted for one. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like “Little Boy Blunt” anymore than most liberals do, but I do respect the choice made by the voters of Missouri.
These civic leaders have made it clear, they don't want the Governor to listen to the voters of Missouri, they want him to listen to them. This should encourage the voters to control their government, and tell Big Business to stop trying to silence their vote.
A quick search of campaign contributions at: http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml reveals that most of the members of the Civic Counsel have no political allegiance. They donate to both political parties so that they can have influence, no matter who wins.
They want the Governor to oppose initiative petitions; the most democratic process still available to the voters.
For those that don’t know; Initiative petitions are citizen-generated ballot questions which, if passed majority vote, have the force of law, the same as if the state legislature passed them. To get on the ballot, you have to get a large number of signatures (hence the "petition" part) and follow other rules that are determined by the Missouri Constitution. You know, the Constitution that so many liberals and conservatives only acknowledge when it serves their purpose.
The positive aspect of initiative petition is that it comes directly from citizens, and is passed directly by majority vote. Hence "politicking" is kept to a minimum, since no politicians are involved. It's one of the most directly democratic means of passing laws (as opposed to the representative democracy of legislatures).
It will be interesting to see the response from the voters of Missouri when they find out that Donald Hall Jr., president and CEO of Hallmark Cards wants the Governor of Missouri to oppose one of the most fundamental democratic processes available to the voters.
- You are correct; every lawyer practicing in Missouri is a member of the Missouri Bar. This is not an option. How do the members of the Bar maintain their income? -Judges!
If judges presented mandates that would decrease litigation; that would seriously interfere with business. Like most industries, the legal industry is motivated by the almighty dollar. That is human nature, as one's success is often measured by one's wealth. You call it a conspiracy in order to encourage those that lack sufficient knowledge to look away. Do attorneys conspire to make money? Of course they do! Welcome to business 101.
As far as secrecy; I don't like it when the Governor does it any better than I do the Judicial Selection Committee. I am all for transparency and separation of powers. People only hide what they don't want others to see.
“Secrecy and a free, democratic government don't mix.” –Harry S. Truman
I will extend the same offer to you that was presented to Mr. Boulware.
How many people do you expect to attend the Nov. 29th forum? I need to know how many pamphlets to print up.
I'm sure those who attend will know much about the judges they voted to retain in the last general election. I'm also sure that they will be quite amused by the fact that the Missouri Supreme Court changed the Missouri Plan without voter input. We can show them how the Courts interpretation of Article V, Section 5 permitted them to cover up reports of bad judges that had been available to the voters at the inception of the Missouri Plan. Let's see how they feel about being duped.
Mr. Byrne,
I'll accept your offer of a civil exchange. Give me a call, we can go to lunch and discuss the Missouri Plan.
Stephen...
Sorry that I didn't respond sooner. The short week and the Thanksgiving holiday kept me busy.
Though I do appreciate your offer to meet for lunch, I am more interested in a videotaped discussion on the merits and flaws of the current plan.
I do have the ability to provide you with an on-the-spot copy of the video, to prevent any out of context presentation, and would agree to a stipulation that the video can only be presented in its entirety. (or in 10 minute segments as YouTube permits.)
YouTube is a great place to allow others to view and comment on the video.
2moons dil
2moons gold
2moon dil
buy 2moons dil
cheap 2moons gold
9Dragons gold
9 Dragons gold
buy 9 Dragons gold
cheap 9Dragons gold
9Dragons money
aion gold
aion online gold
aion money
buy aion gold
cheap aion gold
Asda Story gold
Asda Story money
buy Asda Story Gold
cheap Asda Story gold
Here is the eve isk,
eve online isk is the regular site.
buy isk we supply the regular service.
I like to buy eve online isk here.
It is the shadow of legend Gold which make me very happy these days, my brother says buy shadow of legend Gold is his favorite games gold he likes, he usually buy some sol gold to start his game and most of the time he will win the cheap shadow of legend Gold back and give me some shadow of legend money to play the game.
Post a Comment