It's been awhile since I have posted. Very simple explanation. After doing this for approximately twenty years I felt it was time to "retire" and let the younger folks get more involved. Seeing some of the things that are happening recently I've decided to get "back in the swim". Probably for a short time though.
With that said, let's talk abour the upcoming election and the ballot question about the selection of Kansas Supreme Court Justices. A yes vote on the ballot question will change the procedure and make it a direct election by the citizens. A no vote keeps the current procedure.
So, first we must look at what the current procedure is, which is a nominating commission and then selection by the governor. The Supreme Court Nominating Commission has nine members. There is one lawyer and one non-lawyer from each of the state's four congressional districts, plus one lawyer who serves as chairperson. Nonlawyers are appointed by the governor. Lawyers are elected by other lawyers within their congressional districts. The chairperson is elected by lawyers statewide. The commission presents three candidates to the governor. If the governor does not select one of the candidates within 60 days then by the state constitution the list is turned over to the chief justice to make the selection.
Now, the folks that are supporting a no vote have been saying that the justices are selected on a merit basis and are supposedly voter approved. They are also saying that if the positions were filled by citizen elections that billionaires would control the elections. Now, needless to say the "vote no" folks are heavily democratic and are full of BS.
Who determines whether the candidates have merit? Lawyers elected by other lawyers to nominate other lawyers to serve. Yeah, I know, there are 4 nonlawyers on the commission, but there are 5 lawyers. Do the math, it's lawyers picking lawyers. Voter approved? Only after they have served are they placed on the ballot for a vote for retention.
The most recent appointee to the Supreme Court, Larkin Walsh never served one day as a judge in a lower court. She had been a lawyer for approximately 20 years and had served as a law clerk to judges. But, she herself never sat on the bench prior to her appointment to the state's highest court.
Now as for the statements about billionaires controlling the court......gotta laugh. Go ahead, tell me that there are no billionaires telling democrats what to do. Ever hear of George Soros? It seems though that blaming billionaires for anything and everything that ails folks is the buzz word of the left wing element of this country.
My choice: Vote "yes" to the ballot question and let the people decide, not a lawyer controlled commission.
