Editorial: Votingforjudges.org makes it easier to size up judicial candidates
Voting for a judicial candidate should never come down to which name on the ballot is more appealing. votingforjudges.org makes the task of learning more about candidates easier.
Seattle Times Editorial
JUDICIAL elections often don’t have the buzz of higher-profile political races, but their outcomes have a major impact on people going through the state’s court systems.
Unlike other candidates for political office, judicial candidates cannot run as part of a party or on a platform of issues or make promises of how they would rule. So, voters have a harder time evaluating them.
In recent years, an influx of campaign contributions by special-interest groups is turning money into a larger factor in judicial races.
The resource votingforjudges.org provides voters with unbiased and comprehensive information on judicial candidates, including ratings from organizations.
Like a judge presiding over a case, voters must make the most informed and fair decision possible for the sake of justice and public safety.
A blind justice system is a worthy ideal, but in practice, the efficiency and effectiveness of our state’s courts rest in the hands of judges administering justice.
The role of a judge is to carry out the law, but also to employ discretion in the courtroom on how offenses are punished. Often, personal qualities such as fairness, compassion and open-mindedness play a major role.
Voters should know whom they are voting for before casting a ballot.
Editorial board members are editorial page editor Kate Riley, Frank A. Blethen, Ryan Blethen, Jonathan Martin, Thanh Tan, Blanca Torres, Robert J. Vickers, William K. Blethen (emeritus) and Robert C. Blethen (emeritus).