Essay On Partisan Elections

We can conclude that in order to amend the Texas constitution a proposal must be initiated during a regular session or special session of the legislator. In addition, a unanimous two-thirds vote must be achieved before an election can be held for the people to vote on the amendment. Although citizens voiced their concerns for reform of the constitution during the 1970’s only one reform attempt resulted in an opportunity for the electorate to vote. In the end the constitutional reform did not succeed because of shady tactics, specific individuals, and fear of change. The recent Supreme Court Ruling on gay marriages is an example of why the Texas constitution is to constrict and non-free flowing. Due to the fact that it is so detailed they would not of had the ability to allow gay marriages to be legal without a specific

     In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year’s election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

However, each of these alternatives have more cons than pros. Partisan elections do not even our courts, they just bring the bias out into the open, and make it easier for judges to be viewed as unfair and to make unfair statements without fear. States with partisan elections also have more party campaign donations for justices, and in turn more partisan justices. Their supreme courts are not evenly split between republicans and democrats, but rather dominated by one party. This partisan influence carries into states that also have only partisan primaries, such as Ohio. Direct appointment of justices seems like a good idea on the surface, but it only works if we assume that governors are truly unbiased and nonpartisan, neither of which can possibly be true. Governors are elected by a party, and run for that party. A governor’s appointment of justices would only lead to justices that align with his or her views being

I will now examine some of last election year's results. Voter turnout has decreased in the past years. There are two main factors that have been coming up in the past years. First, many citizens say that who is elected in office is not as important as it once was. Secondly, younger Americans are more cynical and disconnected from politics than ever. I think there is too much information out there and another thing that might be the reason this is happening is because candidates insult other candidates with their campaign ads. This confuses the voter like I mentioned before and makes them not want to go out and vote. In the next paragraph I will discuss why I think judges should be decided by partisan vote.

When Texas became a state in 1845, judges were appointed by the governor with state consent, but in but since 1876, judges at all levels of courts have been elected by the

In my analysis of the Texas Constitution I will assess the three branches of our State Government, the Legislative Branch, Executive Branch and finally the Judicial Branch. Our State Government resembles our National Government in various ways but also in very different ways which we will review in this essay. I will identify a handful of criticisms and problems associated with the provisions in each of these branches of our State Government and identify suggested reforms that many feel are needed.

The Texas judicial system has been called one of the most complex in the United States, if not the world. It features five layers of courts, several instances of overlapping jurisdiction, and a bifurcated appellate system at the top level. The structure of the system is laid out in Article 5 of the Texas Constitution.

There are numerous varieties of election races in Texas. The state Constitution and the political society in Texas together have made a framework of our legal system that welcomes Texans to pick applicants for a great numerous public offices in all levels of the government inside the state. The Constitution needs direct election for different state offices inside the executive branch and inside the legal system of the judicial branch, likewise with respect to various county level offices. A few legislative activities oblige changing the Constitution, that also needs special established constitutional amendment elections. Numerous metropolitan and other local offices are filled

In 1822, Stephen F. Austin established one of the first courts in Texas and appointed a provisional justice of peace. Since Texas was a part of Mexico at the time, the Mexican governor replaced the justice of peace with three elected officials. (Utexas) Soon after Independence, the republic of Texas under the 1836 Constitution, established a supreme court and allowed Congress to create inferior courts. Judges in such courts were to be elected by Congress. Counties, at the time, had County and Justice of Peace courts, whose judges were popularly elected. With the entrance of Texas into the Union and the adoption of numerous constitutions during the period, Texas retained a similar judicial structure. The current 1876 Constitution created a

The 2003 redistricting exertion was amazingly disputable chiefly in view of the considerable number of individuals included in the redistricting. When they overcame with all the exceptional meeting and everybody consented to the term Texas was improved. To help all that attempt to keep running in the race. In 2011 the redistricting Texas increased four seats in the House of Representatives. Redistricting engages control of our races by allowing inhabitant administrators to offer partitioned some help with partnering, hurt political enemies and pick their voters before the voters pick them. A conclusive target of redistricting like most distinctive thoughts in American administrative issues is to keep everything sensible. In that it is to redraw

In the process of judicial selection in the New York, the court system conducts partisan elections to choose the judges for the trial courts. The candidates for the judicial positions initially compete in primary elections to clearly identify those to represent the respective parties in the general election except for the candidate for the supreme court. The judicial system chooses the Supreme Court candidates through a party convention system which involves the primary voters electing convention delegates. The delegates are then tasked with the responsibility of choosing the

The State of Texas should continue electing state-level judges in partisan elections instead of being appointed by the governor with approval of the Texas Senate. The most popular method of selecting state-level judges is the assisted appointment, where a nominating committee of both lawyers and non-lawyers review the applications of individuals wanting the position. This committee then gives their list of the top candidates to the governor, and the governor then chooses from that list. In my opinion, this would be the best method of selecting state-level judges as each candidate is reviewed in a committee chosen by the state bar/executive branch. This helps promote the best candidates being chosen. However, given the two choices, elections

The article introduces the Supreme Court’s decision in Republican party of Minnesota v. White which rendered the speech restriction on judicial candidates unconstitutional, and explains the undue politicization of judicial elections that resulted from it. It also acknowledges scholars who consider judicial elections to be the examples of a proper democratic process. Cann mentions the various interest groups that manipulate the results of the elections through massive funding and biased media coverage; also, the political parties which themselves are an interest group in most of the judicial elections as reflected in their explicit recruiting and endorsement of candidates. It mentions how voting patterns and party identification define the outcomes of an election and how retention election of judges can lead to gross miscarriage of justice.

Yet the elective system gives the judges political party a stronger voice to be heard and lets their party viewpoints stand out to the public that vote them into office. However, in today’s elections more judicial campaigns are getting costlier and they are digging

The other issue, of where the money is coming from to support these campaigns is an important question to address. Because state judges cant legally run a campaign like any other candidate. For example that can’t make campaign promises that could affect the outcome of certain cases as a state judge. So a major disadvantage for electing state judges is the possibly that it could lead to political bias and to unlawful decisions in state courts. An example of this happening was mentioned in the judicial process book, a West Virginia oil company executive contributed 3 million dollars to the election of Ben Benjamin. Once Judge Benjamin was elected he decided to overturn a judgment that had been made against the oil company before his election. The Supreme Court ruled that this was unconstitutional and that any extreme donations made for the election of a state judge is unlawful because it could lead to political bias and threatens a fair trial. This shows the downfalls of this election process. I think most states have chosen to keep this system because it’s a much easier process then the