A defeat of the chief justice of Washington's supreme court in tomorrow's election would be another victory for well-financed special interests. Preventing such an outcome should top the state's election reform to-do list.
Anyone who watches cable TV has likely seen the personal-attack ads in support of Redmond property-rights lawyer John Groen. Most of the $1.6 million spent on his campaign comes from the Building Industry Association of Washington, an essentially Republican organization whose purpose is to gut regulations, no matter the level of public support. Rather than attack the court's decisions, the ads malign the personality of Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, a 12-year court veteran who has the endorsements of most of the state's newspapers but far less money.
Groen gained financial advantage by taking large campaign donations after a law limiting those contributions was passed but before it went into effect. He is reportedly the only supreme court candidate this year who didn't uphold the intent of that money-limit law. The building association has run "independent" efforts to support the campaign since.
Washington shouldn't allow any single interest to buy an election, regardless of ideology. Money can't be eliminated from politics but a public system to maintain balance might help. An organization pushing the idea is Washington Public Campaigns, which cites successful examples of such a system in other states. Publicly financing just supreme court races would reportedly cost $4 million.
But reform shouldn't stop there. The state needs to set higher standards for elections in each of the 39 counties, guaranteeing equal implementation. It also needs to raise the hurdles for passage of citizen initiatives, which are often financed by special-interest groups that hire paid signature gatherers to put them on the ballot.