Which Republican Supports an Impartial Judiciary?

Which Republican lawyer state representative dislikes the selection of fair and impartial judges - Rep. Bryan Pratt.

Which Republican lawyer state representative respects a neutral, fair and impartial third branch of the government called the judiciary - Rep. Brian Yates.

Since Matt Blunt has been in office, extremist Republicans have entertained themselves with attacking the Missouri Plan (a plan to remove partisan politics from the selection of judges). Thanks to Sunshine Requests, we found that most of the attacks were orchestrated within Blunt's office through the Adam Smith Foundation and other make believe groups.

This year HJR 10 is current method of attack on the neutral judiciary. The Missouri Plan allows for a nominating commission to be composed of 3 lawyers from around the state (voted on by lawyers in non-partisan elections), 3 non-lawyer/citizen appointments by a Governor and the chief judge of the Supreme Court. The nominating commission interviews ALL candidates and sends three qualified folks up to the Governor. Merit, not politics, decides who is a judge in Missouri.

HJR 10 introduces more politics into the selection of judges, not less. Republican appointed judges (who have since retired) are opposed to HJR 10. Democratic appointed judges (who have since retired) are opposed to HJR 10. The Missouri Bar (every lawyer in the state is automatically a member of the Missouri Bar) is opposed to HJR 10. HJR 10 allows the governor to reject panels (instead of having to select someone from the list of three qualified candidates). HJR 10 allows for the senate to get involved with the citizen appointments to the nominating commission (more politics). HJR 10 changes the length of terms to four years from the current six years. That equals more politics because a six year term on the nominating commission only allows a two term, popular governor (like Governor Ashcroft) to appoint all the lay members to the nominating commission, not an unpopular governor (like Governor Blunt).

HJR 10 makes the "hearings, debates and votes" open to the public. Not even Governor Blunt wanted to have his interviews open to the public. Can you imagine any company, government or non-profit in the world that would want to have open job "hearing, debates and votes"? Open "hearings, debates and votes" would make the process less effective in picking judges, but much better at turning it into a political circus.

Why is this important? Most importantly, no one wants more partisan politics involved in our judiciary. Not the KC Chamber of Commerce, not citizens who would have to appear in front of partisan judges (Republican or Democratic) and not lawyers. The Missouri Plan has been copied around the country for a reason - it is good public policy to take partisan politics out of the selection of judges.

From the partisan politics side, both Yates and Pratt are running for Sen. Matt Bartle's seat. Both Pratt and Yates are lawyers (both at Shook Hardy & Bacon). One of these representatives is busy attacking the judiciary; one of these representatives is standing up to crazy attacks by the extremists in his own party. Voters, lawyers and donors will have to look at the votes of Pratt and Yates and decide who to support.

HJR 41 - Some Republicans Wish to Abandon a Neutral Judiciary

The Missouri Plan is under attack in the Missouri House. Here's a recent email from Rep. John Burnett:

House leaders closed debate with Reps lined up to talk

After a brief debate House leaders closed debated by moving the "previous question". I was left standing at the microphone with a proposed amendment in my hand unable to get recognized to offer it. My friends consoled me that it was something I should be proud of. The Majority clearly did not want to hear what I had to say.

By a vote of 80-63 the House gave first round approval to the resolution. All 11 Democrat Lawyers in the House voted against it. Burnett, Bringer, Donnelly, Grill, Jeff Harris, Connie Johnson, Rachel Storch, Mike Talboy, Mike Vogt, Terry Witte and Jake Zimmerman.

On the Republican side only Flook, Pratt and Lipke opposed it. Stanley Cox (R-Sedalia) was the sponsor and handled the bill on the floor. Judiciary Chair, Bryan Stevenson (R-Jasper) gave a speech that some thought was hilarious talking about how he loved all judges, young or old and in fact hopes to be a judge himself someday soon. Then he joined Cox, Bob Onder (R-Lake St. Louis), and Tim Jones (R-Eureka) in supporting it.

Final approval in the House requites 82 votes but it appears that they will be there. Will keep you posted on the vote there too.

State Rep John P. Burnett

Here's the letter I sent to Rep. Bryan Stevenson (R - Joplin):

As a lawyer to a fellow lawyer, I would urge you to reconsider your vote on HJR 49.

Missouri is a swing state – it is currently held by Republicans and will one day be held by Democrats. That’s a good thing. The Missouri Supreme Court and our Courts of Appeals should not be subject to those same swings. We tell our children in civics classes that judges are fair, neutral and that they don’t play flavors. By abandoning the Missouri Plan in favor of a system more like the federal government, we are inviting partisan games to be played with our judiciary. While I’m a Democrat, I believe that the entire Supreme Court appointed by then Gov. Ashcroft was a good one. What was wrong with the Missouri Plan when it gave us Judge Holstein or Judge Price? Our system worked then and works now. Let’s be proud of a neutral judiciary that is hard to be influenced by politics – either Democrats or Republicans. Please join your Republican lawyer colleagues Pratt, Flook and Libke in voting NO on HJR 49.

Please give me a call if you have any questions

.

What do we tell our kids - well, we shut off debate because we don't care what other people think and we want judges who will always decide with our side instead of being fair and neutral. Can't the Republicans see that eventually this will back fire and some liberal governor will appoint incredibly liberal judges?

Pratt Calls Voice Vote on Court Bill

HRJ 41 is a bill that would limit the power of the Missouri Supreme Court to hear certain types of cases. The official description is it "Proposes a constitutional amendment prohibiting state courts from levying or imposing new or increased taxes, licenses, or fees without legislative or voter approval."

The sponsor - Rep. Jane Cunningham - says it is to prevent courts from questioning the funding for schools. No one can point to a Missouri court that has attempted it, but you can never be too safe. No court has ever ordered that all trees be cut down, let's amend the constitution for that too!!

In presiding over the House, Representative and Speaker Pro Tem Bryan Pratt from Blue Springs and a lawyer at Shook Hardy & Bacon, used the highly unusual move of calling a voice vote to end amendments to the bill. According to the St. Louis Post, at least ten Democrats were standing up to add amendments, including one protecting the Second Amendment, per Rep. John Burnett. Rep. Pratt's hearing is so darn good that he could hear the very slim majority of his party crying out. Nothing like democracy in action - you think they teach strong arm tactics in civics class in Blue Springs?

Pratt is safe in his state representative seat until he is term limited out. The rub between him and some in the legal profession (including his own firm) comes when he is done and runs for Sen. Matt Bartle's seat. Pratt didn't vote for pay raises for judges (after they have been stagnant for ten years). He's helping push the amendment of the constitution to limit the power of the Supreme Court to even review tax cases. His former managing partner at Shook is in Jefferson City lobbying one way, Rep. Pratt goes the other.

Throw into the mix that Pratt's fellow Shook lawyer - Rep. Brian Yates - is much more aligned with Matt Bartle & Jeff Roe. Yates has made it clear that he wants Bartle’s seat, too. It’s going to be an interesting primary for this Senate seat and the halls of Shook Hardy & Bacon.

Jeff Roe Backs Huckabee, with Rep. Yates

OK, call me a conspiracy theorist.

Here's a post by Steve Kraske on Buzz Blog:

The Mike Huckabee bandwagon appears to be racing through Missouri.

On Monday, Missouri backers of Huckabee are set to announce endorsements from 27 state lawmakers. Among them are a slew of Kansas City-area Republicans, including state Sen. Matt Bartle of Lee’s Summit and state Reps. Brian Baker of Belton, Will Kraus of Raytown, Brian Yates of Lee’s Summit and Bob Nance of Excelsior Springs.

Those endorsements, his supporters say, will give the former Arkansas governor the endorsement lead in Missouri. In second place, the Hucksters say, is Rudy Giuliani with 13 legislative endorsements.

Many of those Missourians will invade Iowa for the final two weeks of the campaign. At the helm of Huckabee’s Missouri campaign: Jeff Roe of Axiom Strategies in Kansas City.

In a sign of what may be coming down the road when State Senator Matt Bartle is term limited out in 3 years, Jeff Roe and Rep. Brian Yates seem to be on the same team. That leaves Rep. Bryan Pratt out in the cold. Recall that both Rep. Pratt and Yates work at the same law firm and enjoyed some joint publicity in an article entitled "Devil's Advocates; Two Shook Hardy lawyers continue the firm's dark legacy."

Like him or love him, Sen. Bartle has the Eastern Jackson County Republican primary voters on his team. Bartle's endorsement will mean a lot. Those Eastern Jackson County Republican primary voters like Sen. Bartle and Gov. Huckabee. I bet Rep. Yates has already hired Jeff Roe and that he wins the Republican primary.

Grisamore (47th) has a Tough Quarter

According to Blue Blog, Grisamore is having a tough quarter.

Here's the link to the MEC filing. Ron Richard (who the Republicans want to be speaker in 2008) gave Grisamore $1,000 (which is $775 more than the cap allowed by the law). KC Blue Blog makes the following pointed analysis:

The Republican from Lee's Summit reported raising $3850 and spent $1524.67 on rent and lodging leaving him with a report of just over $2600 cash on hand.

Here's where it gets worse:

Over $2500 of the money raised is over the $325 contribution limit and with so few checks sent in the first place it is almost definitely not a burden. Therefore, Grisamore must return the excess money leaving him with only $100 bucks in the bank and $8500 in debt.

That has to make Rep. Yates who is relying on that district to stay Republican significantly queasy. Maybe Rep. Pratt will rub his tummy for him.

Pratt & Yates are both ramping up for a run for Matt Bartle's senate seat, so they really don't want to blow their cash on Grisamore's seat. Bob Johnson may make a run for Grisamore's seat, with the support of Rev. Tom Haley (who barely lost this seat in 2006).

The 47th is going to be a good one to watch.

Supreme Court Musings

Gov. Matt Blunt pulled the trigger on the Supreme Court. He appointed Court of Appeals Judge Patricia Breckenridge, with only a minor slap in the face.

Blunt said she was "the best candidate of the three candidates submitted to me." You know what, neither Bond nor Ashcroft when appointing Breckenridge to judgeships back-handed her like that. She is smart, qualified and deserving. She's a R, I'm a D, but as an advocate of good government I am proud that the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan worked well, ONCE AGAIN. It worked for Ashcroft, Blunt, Carnahan and Holden; why is it only broken for Blunt? Maybe because Blunt doesn't understand that everything isn't supposed to be partisan. Blunt said "I believe that Judge Breckenridge can improve the Missouri Supreme Court by replacing one of its most liberal members." Who said it needs improving? If it does, it will be because of intellectual fairness and protecting the Constitution, not by appointments of partisan conservatives (which, Breckenridge is not)

It is important to note that this was a fight started by Matt Blunt and Jeff Roe and financed by folks who want to purchase justice.. Jeff Roe took out Judge Brown in Cole County and this movement grew wings. The opposition is not Democrats. Blunt/Roe's opposition are people who want fair judges, people who want good government (i.e. good Americans, both R & D). Jeff Roe's Missouri Political News Service says Judge Breckenridge is "the best choice with a poor system." OUCH!! The Adam Smith Foundation says she takes "her post on the Supreme Court under a cloud of doubt." BAMMM! Ultra-conservative groups are beating on Blunt stating "Gov. Blunt has evidently caved in and decided to abide by that very process. Too many politicians have suffered the fate of trying to have issues both ways, and this may be the final strike for Gov. Blunt." ZINGGG!

The group that formed to defend our justice system - www.protectjustice.com - has both R's and D's. Chip Robertson was an Ashcroft appointee to the Supreme Court and issued this statement:

Missourians for Fair and Impartial Courts applaud the governor for upholding his duty and exercising his prerogatives under the constitution.

Gov. Blunt has demonstrated his allegiance to the Missouri constitution and to Missouri’s 70-year history of leading the nation in selecting judges according to a nonpartisan selection method. The Governor took an oath to uphold the Missouri constitution and he has upheld that oath by selecting one of the Supreme Court nominees from a panel put forth by the Appellate Judicial Commission.

Well, that's an olive branch. I love a conspiracy, but I can't make sense of this. Republicans attacking Blunt for appointing a Republican. You can bet this only helps out Attorney General Jay Nixon. Let's just hope that the Republican representative who work at Shook Hardy & Bacon (Rep. Pratt and Yates) realize that this is a dead issue and they do not attempt to amend the Missouri Constitution.