Nine democrats joined republicans in voting against it basically, the leadership saying state residents are not in the mood for any tax increases. Gonna ask all of you jump in was anyone surprised by wolf backing down on the sales tax or the republicans flatout rejecting his proposed budget, his revised budget . No and no. Thats me no and no. [ laughs ] no and no. Im not surprised at all. Thats the bottom line. The house and the senate are not gonna do that. They didnt run on that. They ran on no taxes, and they dont want to have any primaries, let me be clear. But the governor said from the beginning that he was willing to compromise on some of the issues, and if there were other ways to try to get at the right amount of income and the right amount of resources for education, he was gonna do that. So he had put a compromise on the table before the vote in hopes that there would be at least some movement, i think, by the legislatures. Its obvious that public voting kept them from being
More independent, impartial judiciary. You know, they are largely a historical vestige of their time. Tracy . I just agree largely what people have to say. Every selection method impacts judges decisions. Elections were adopted, as matt noted, to try to check the perceived abuse of the appointment process. I dont think it was merely perceived, the evidence is pretty strong on that. But in terms of the specific question of why dont voters then change the method of selection, whats interesting is the florida case since thats the case before us is they did change the med of selection the method of selection more appellate judges right . But not with trial judges, not with the judges that they think of as the judges in their lives. And i think thats pretty entering, to try to understand pretty interesting, to try to understand if voters feel that this tension between accountability and impartiality is one that they would like to resolve when the judges are closer to where they are. Whats d
Screeria nigeria. Visits phoenix to talk about Home Ownership followed by a discussion about religion and the free market. On january 20th the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case challenging restrictions on judicial candidates directly soliciting Campaign Contributions. Legal analysts discuss the pending case and judicial elections at the National Press club in washington, d. C. This is an hour and ten minutes. Good morning, everyone. The timetable this morning is pretty tight. We want to be able to give a lot of time for questions. And so were going to begin our presentation to you this morning. My name is andrew coen. Im a fellow at the Brennan Center and a journalist with cbs news and the marshal project. And im delighted to be here in sunny, warm washington. To be part of this interesting presentation. In a moment, im going to introduce this distinguished panel each of whom knows a great deal more about this important Supreme Court case than i do. A couple of points. T
It doesnt really matter whether or not its the Campaign Committee that asks or the judge that asks, the judge is going to know at the end of the day who his friends are and who are not his friends. So im curious again, sort of why, you know, there has not been more of a move to, you know florida passed these laws to solve this problem but it doesnt seem like this particular law solved the problem and especially when you thing about the massey case, i think there was a trip to the south of flans involved in that one, too. So the issue seems to be not so much the direct solicitation but the Campaign Contributions. The criminal defense or the criminal case findings are not as direct in effect as the effect in cases involving law firms and say tort suits mass litigation businesses and business disputes between individuals or businesses as defendants in tort cases. In those cases the hypothesis is and what theyre test is a direct effect. A business gives, a law firm gives, it does better in
Regulating what judges and lawyers can talk about. That is a basic overview of the case, and we can get into more at question time. Thanks. Tracy, youre up. Im happy to be here today. Turns out it is very cold in nashville. But in nashville, we just close. All the public schools, private schools, everything is closed today in nashville, the temperatures that are slightly warmer than the temperatures in d. C. Today. My role today is principally as an empirical legal scholar. I ask questions about the decisions, courts and judges make and why they make those decisions and i answer the questions by using statistical empirical methods, right . So thats what i do. Im one of the members of one of the amici in a brief filed by empirical scholars and law Political Science and economics. And Political Science. Two of those are my field of law, and Political Science. But i also teach law. As andrew mentioned. All law School Classrooms are fantastic. At least the ones i teach in our fantastic. An