After a dozen years of slowly rising heat, the campaign for merit selection of judges has come to a boil. The Senate Executive Committee is soon to consider a joint resolution that would put the issue on the ballot next year; voters in the November elections could then decide whether they want Illinois judges to be only judges, instead of disguised political appointees under obligation to their party leaders.
Chances for passing the resolution look better than usual. A strong enough push from the committee may finally help the merit selection amendment over its two big obstacles–the requirement for a 60 percent majority in both houses and the stubborn opposition from those who want to keep some kind of political control over judgeships.
One hopeful sign is that political control isn`t worth as much as it used to be. In the 1984 primary election, for instance, the Cook County Central Democratic Organization endorsed six judges for the Circuit Court, and five of them lost. That carried a message to a lot of politicians: If the old system no longer delivers the vote, why keep fighting for it?
Another reason for hope is the kind of support the amendment is now getting. A court-appointed special commission under Chicago attorney Jerold Solovy has just called for merit selection; it pointed out, among other things, that 50 of Cook County`s 171 full circuit judges are former party officials or workers. House Minority Leader Lee Daniels is sponsoring the resolution; State`s Atty. Richard M. Daley is strongly backing it; and, after years of cautious neutrality on the subject, the Chicago Bar Association has a new president, Richard Phelan, who is focusing his efforts on getting it passed.
Finally, every one of the 14 suburbs that voted last April on a proposed merit selection amendment voted ”yes.” Clearly, voters are no longer impressed with the solemn foolery about their ”democratic right” to elect judges–a right that consists of puzzling over meaningless lists of names chosen for them by party bosses. Even powerful opponents like Senate President Philip Rock and House Speaker Michael Madigan need some new arguments against merit selection; that ”democracy” bit looks forlorn–particularly since they must argue that it is somehow not democratic to let voters decide the issue in a referendum.
The proposed amendment would make merit selection mandatory for all judges of the Supreme and Appellate Courts, and for circuit and associate judges in Cook County. All other circuits could choose the new system or keep the present one. Nominating commissions in each circuit would choose three nominees for each vacancy, and the governor would appoint one of the three;
the commissions would be bipartisan and have a majority of nonlawyers.
Adopting merit selection would at last get Illinois judicial candidates out of the whole contradictory business of having to beg for party
endorsement, run for office and cadge campaign contributions from fellow lawyers–all the while promising voters that they will deliver impartial justice.
