Jim Ostrowski
May 22nd, 2005, 11:06 AM
In NY State, trial judges are selected by a bizarre and outdated system called judicial conventions. Delegates are elected by Assembly District and need to file petitions with 500 signatures at the same time as other candidates-June-July.
Except, the process is so cumbersome and the tangible rewards so negligible (for any honest person), that only the political parties bother to run delegates. So, their slates are almost always unopposed. So, in essence, the four or five party chairmen pick the delegates who then by and large do what they are told at September conventions and nominate candidates selected by the chairmen.
So it is that our state judges are picked by five party chairmen.
Not only is this bad in itself, but it has further negative ramifications. The parties use their monopoly power to nominate--and sometimes cross-nominate to guarantee victory--to extract money and favors from the candidates. This money is then used to prop up the whole machine apparatus and elect machine-candidates--you know, the same ones who got us into this mess of a dying community!
So, I say, this is the year for people to realize that the tax revolt must extend to the judiciary. It's an elite institution that too often serves elites against populist interests. If the tax revolt ignores the judges, don't be surprise when those same judges take from us victories won in the other two branches of government that are closer to the people.
For practical reasons, any such effort should be focused in the Republican and Independence Parties. A few slates with respected community leaders could very well prevail and hold sway at the conventions. This would be yet another shot across the bow of the local political class.
Fellas, you didn't think we were going to forget about the judicial conventions, did you?
Jim Ostrowski
Delegate, Democratic Judicial Convention, 1977
Except, the process is so cumbersome and the tangible rewards so negligible (for any honest person), that only the political parties bother to run delegates. So, their slates are almost always unopposed. So, in essence, the four or five party chairmen pick the delegates who then by and large do what they are told at September conventions and nominate candidates selected by the chairmen.
So it is that our state judges are picked by five party chairmen.
Not only is this bad in itself, but it has further negative ramifications. The parties use their monopoly power to nominate--and sometimes cross-nominate to guarantee victory--to extract money and favors from the candidates. This money is then used to prop up the whole machine apparatus and elect machine-candidates--you know, the same ones who got us into this mess of a dying community!
So, I say, this is the year for people to realize that the tax revolt must extend to the judiciary. It's an elite institution that too often serves elites against populist interests. If the tax revolt ignores the judges, don't be surprise when those same judges take from us victories won in the other two branches of government that are closer to the people.
For practical reasons, any such effort should be focused in the Republican and Independence Parties. A few slates with respected community leaders could very well prevail and hold sway at the conventions. This would be yet another shot across the bow of the local political class.
Fellas, you didn't think we were going to forget about the judicial conventions, did you?
Jim Ostrowski
Delegate, Democratic Judicial Convention, 1977