Your Opinion: Voters historically reject influence peddling

Dear Editor:

Back in the 1930s, Missouri's citizenry became increasingly dissatisfied with how much politics was influencing the selection of judges and the decisions judges were making.

In the quest to have an impartial judicial system, Missouri voters amended the state constitution in 1940 by adopting the "Nonpartisan Selection of Judges Court Plan," which was placed on the ballot by initiative petition. The adoption of the plan by the voters resulted from a public backlash against the widespread abuses of the judicial system by "Boss Tom" Pendergast's Kansas City political machine and by the political control exhibited by ward bosses in St. Louis.

Since that time, Missouri's nonpartisan court plan, known nationwide as "the Missouri Plan," has served as a model for selecting judges in a process where merit plays a role more important than politics. Indeed, more than 30 other states have changed their own judicial selection processes emulating the Missouri Plan.

In the 74 years since that time, the support for that plan has been re-affirmed by voters of Missouri on four separate occasions.

In fact, just two years ago, the voters of Cole County rejected by an overwhelming margin Constitutional Amendment 3 - an ill-advised attempt by special interests to change the plan in order to allow increased political influence in the selection of some of our judges.

The voters of Cole County each time have shown their independence by rejecting these attempts to influence our courts. They clearly understand the need for a truly independent judiciary. They want their cases decided based on the law and not on politics or on who gave the most money.

We voters of Cole County are once again faced with a decision related to our courts. A Washington, DC-based Political Action Committee, with a membership kept secret, is now spending $200,000 in an attempt to buy our courthouse in support of a campaign of mudslinging.

What will members of that PAC expect of the candidate it is supporting if he defeats the incumbent judge, who has been a genuine public servant in the highest sense of the word? We can't be sure, except to expect the candidate they favor to have an obligation to make judicial decisions in ways to favor their political and economic interests.

We Cole County voters have rejected such attempts before and should do so again.