POSTED: Monday, December 7th, 2009 at 1:00 am

BY: dmc-admin

If Justice David T. Prosser runs for re-election in 2011, he will have the option of using public funding for his campaign.

On Dec. 1, Gov. Jim Doyle signed the Impartial Justice Bill into law, providing up to $400,000 of initial public financing for Supreme Court candidates.

In 2007, Prosser, along with the majority of justices, endorsed “realistic, meaningful public financing for Supreme Court elections to facilitate and protect the judicial function.”`

While the legislation is intended to level the playing field for candidate spending, which has escalated in recent years, some question whether the law will have the desired impact.

“I’ll be surprised if this solves the problem,” said University of Wisconsin-Madison Political Science Professor Charles Franklin.

In order to qualify for public financing, candidates would have to raise $5,000 to $15,000 in donations ranging from $5 to $100. They would then receive $100,000 for the primary election and $300,000 for the general election.

If an opponent or opponents decline public financing and outspend other candidates, those opting for public financing would be eligible for up to $300,000 more for the primary and $900,000 more for the general election.

Franklin noted that while $400,000 is a decent amount of money, it is only a fraction of what recent Supreme Court candidates have spent on their campaigns.

In 2007, Justice Annette K. Ziegler and opponent Linda M. Clifford spent a record $2.6 million combined. And last year Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson invested $1.3 million in her re-election bid, more than seven times what opponent Judge Randy R. Koschnick spent.

The new law does reduce the cap for individual donations for candidates who opt out of public financing from $10,000 to $1,000.

But Franklin suggested that even candidates with deep pockets struggle to reach voters in an election which traditionally garners little interest.

“It is unlikely that $400,000 will produce a very informed electorate,” he said.

The new law makes no effort to stop third party advocates from running potentially influential “issue ads,” which have become prominent in recent Supreme Court elections.
According to campaign watchdog group the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, business group Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce spent more than $1.7 million supporting Justice Michael J. Gableman in 2008. The same year electioneering group Greater Wisconsin Committee spent more than $1.4 million in support of then Justice Louis B. Butler.

“I think the big unknown is the role of independent groups, who still see important issues at stake in judicial outcomes and who may still have incentives to invest far more than $400,000 in such elections,” Franklin said. “In that circumstance, I'm not sure how the Impartial Justice Bill will fare.”

Powered by Bookmarkify™