Merit selection offers Pennsylvanians a better way to select judges. Merit selection is specifically designed to accomplish the most important element of a judicial selection system: getting the most qualified judges on the bench. And, merit selection effectively addresses the problems inherent in electing judges.
Merit selection is the best way to select judges because it:
- Ensures that only the most qualified candidates reach the bench;
- Eliminates the need for prospective judges to raise money to fund campaigns;
- Eliminates the influence of random factors like ballot position, name recognition and fundraising success;
- Values diversity among those involved in the selection process and those who reach the bench; and
- Gives the final say to the public through the use of periodic nonpartisan retention elections.
Why Merit Selection is a Superior Solution
There have been other proposals to reform judicial selection that focus on improving elections, rather than eliminating them. Such proposals include regional elections, campaign finance reform, and nonpartisan elections. None of these proposed reforms comes close to solving the problems of money in judicial campaigns and the lack of emphasis on qualifications for serving as a judge.
Myths and Realities About Merit Selection
Judicial selection is a complex issue. In discussing judicial selection reform, it is important to keep arguments grounded in facts about merit selection and state judicial elections. Through the years, certain “myths” have been bandied about by some opponents of merit selection. Outlined below are some of those myths and the facts that demonstrate their falsity.
