Bill Text: HI SB2238 | 2016 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: Elections; Judges; Judiciary; Office of Elections; Campaign Spending Commission; Study
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 8-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2016-02-19 - Report adopted; Passed Second Reading, as amended (SD 1) and referred to WAM. [SB2238 Detail]
Download: Hawaii-2016-SB2238-Amended.html
|
THE SENATE |
S.B. NO. |
2238 |
|
TWENTY-EIGHTH LEGISLATURE, 2016 |
S.D. 1 |
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
A BILL FOR AN ACT
RELATING TO JUDICIAL ELECTIONS.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that merit selection is a commission-based appointment where a nominating commission screens applicants and selects the most highly qualified candidates for a judicial vacancy. An elected official, usually the governor, appoints one of the recommended candidates. Most merit selection plans include the use of a retention election after the selected judge has served for a specified period. However, there has been a trend in the last decade to eliminate the merit selection of judges or alter its components.
Approximately twenty-two states select their state judges through partisan or nonpartisan elections rather than merit selection. In partisan elections, judicial candidates usually run initially in a party primary to win nomination. Subsequently, partisan nominees run in the general election in which party affiliation is indicated on the ballot. In nonpartisan elections, voters select a candidate at the polls, but the names of the judicial candidates appear on the ballot without party labels.
Proponents of judicial elections often state that the public should have the opportunity to select judicial candidates in open, contested elections as the public selects other government officials. Furthermore, proponents argue that merit selection does not eliminate politics from the selection process, but instead transfers popular politics to behind-the-scene political control. Lastly, proponents express concerns that merit selection may exclude minorities from the bench or diminish their chances of filling judicial seats.
Hawaii has a variation of the judicial merit selection plan that includes a nominating committee, but does not require retention elections for subsequent judicial terms. Pursuant to the Hawaii State Constitution, vacancies in the office of the chief justice, supreme court, intermediate appellate court, and circuit courts are appointed by the governor and vacancies in the district courts are appointed by the chief justice, with the consent of the senate, from a list of nominees compiled by the judicial selection commission. Justices and judges are required to petition the judicial selection commission to be retained in office. If the commission determines that the justice or judge should be retained, the commission is authorized to renew the justice's or judge's term.
The legislature further finds that discussion and planning are necessary before considering an amendment to the Hawaii State Constitution to repeal the State's merit selection system and adopting an election process for state justices and judges. Specifically, further discussion is necessary to ensure that the possible implementation of a judicial election system is carried out efficiently and effectively without compromising the integrity of the election process or the State's judicial system.
The purpose of this Act is to require the judiciary, office of elections, and campaign spending commission to study appropriate methods of implementing a judicial election system in the State and submit a written report, including proposed legislation, to the legislature.
SECTION 2. The judiciary shall review state laws applicable to justices and judges and study appropriate methods of accommodating justices and judges who are elected rather than appointed. Specifically, the judiciary shall:
(1) Review applicable state laws applicable to justices and judges, including but not limited to chapters 571, 601, 602, 603, 604, and 604A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and determine the potential impact that electing, rather than appointing, justices and judges may have on existing laws and the judiciary;
(2) Study the judicial election laws of other jurisdictions that have judicial election systems and determine whether those systems may be appropriate for Hawaii's judicial system;
(3) Determine appropriate methods of implementing a program for the election of justices and judges, including any proposed legislation; and
(4) Determine methods and timeframes to implement an election program.
The judiciary shall submit a written report of its findings and recommendations, including any proposed legislation, to the legislature no later than twenty days prior to the convening of the regular session of 2017.
SECTION 3. The office of elections shall review chapter 11, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and study appropriate methods of implementing a program for the election of justices and judges. Specifically, the office of elections shall:
(1) Review chapter 11, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and determine the potential impact that a judicial election system may have on existing election laws;
(2) Study the election laws of other jurisdictions that have judicial election systems;
(3) Determine appropriate methods of implementing a program for the election of justices and judges, including any proposed legislation; and
(4) Determine methods and timeframes to implement an election program.
The office of elections shall submit a written report of its findings and recommendations, including any proposed legislation, to the legislature no later than twenty days prior to the convening of the regular session of 2017.
SECTION 4. The campaign spending commission shall review part XIII of chapter 11, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and study appropriate methods of implementing a campaign finance program for judicial elections. Specifically, the campaign spending commission shall:
(1) Review part XIII of chapter 11, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and determine the potential impact that a judicial election system may have on existing campaign finance laws;
(2) Study the campaign finance laws of other jurisdictions that have judicial election systems;
(3) Determine appropriate methods of implementing a campaign finance program for judicial elections, including any proposed legislation; and
(4) Determine methods and timeframes to implement a campaign finance program.
The campaign spending commission shall submit a written report of its findings and recommendations, including any proposed legislation, to the legislature no later than twenty days prior to the convening of the regular session of 2017.
SECTION 5. In the course of discussion and study, the judiciary, office of elections, and campaign spending commission may consult and collaborate to determine appropriate methods of implementing a judicial election system in the State.
SECTION 6. This Act shall take effect on January 7, 2059.
Report Title:
Elections; Judges; Judiciary; Office of Elections; Campaign Spending Commission; Study
Description:
Requires the judiciary, office of elections, and campaign spending commission to study appropriate methods of implementing a judicial election system in the State and submit a written report, including proposed legislation, to the legislature. Takes effect on 1/7/2059. (SD1)
The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.
