League of Women Voters of the Cincinnati Area Education Fund
	Ohio State Government November 6, 2012 Election
	Candidates Answer Questions on the Issues Justice; Ohio State Supreme Court; 6 Year Term Starting 1/1/13

The questions were prepared by the League of Women Voters of the Cincinnati Area and asked of all candidates for this office.     See below for questions on Election of Judges, Contributions Click on a name for candidate information.   See also more information about this contest. 1. Do you support or oppose the election of judges and why? Answer from Mike Skindell: I support the popular election of judges. Elections keep judges accountable and advances our constitutional democracy, which is based upon three separate branches of government. Answer from Terrence O'Donnell: Our Ohio Constitution mandates popular election of judges and in 1987, Ohio voters resoundingly rejected a proposal to change that system. The oath of office I took requires me to support the Constitution + not alternate forms of its provisions. Accordingly, I favor the system of having the voters choose judges. While the task of remaining fair and impartial often requires a judicial candidate to refrain from announcing views on disputed or controversial matters that may come before the court, it helps to increase public confidence in the judiciary. Popular election of judges allows the voters the opportunity to identify with individual candidates and thus be more involved than with a merit system where selection of jurists would be left to others without input from the electorate. In the last analysis, while not perfect, our system has produced some outstanding jurists like Tom Moyer, and all can agree on a choice...(over word limit) 2. What changes would you recommend to reduce the perceived influence of money contributions in our courts? Answer from Mike Skindell: I support the public financing of judicial campaigns. As stated by a commission of the American Bar Association "public financing of judicial elections will address the perceived impropriety associated with judicial candidates accepting private contributions from individuals and organizations interested in the outcomes of cases those candidates may later decide as judges." Answer from Terrence O'Donnell: We need to better educate the public to the fact that campaign contributions are not given to judges, but rather to campaign committees that spend the money on major media advertising. Reducing the cost of political advertising would dramatically change the amount of money needed to compete in Ohio's major media markets. In fact, public service announcements are available at no cost and a form could be used to reduce the perceived influence of contributions to judicial candidates. With more than 700 judges in Ohio, it is unlikely the General Assembly will begin to publicly fund judicial campaigns as the cost at current advertising rates would likely run into the tens of millions of dollars. I favor limiting the size of individual contributions to a campaign and publicly reporting the names of the contributors to maintain transparency and keep the public informed about this issue. Responses to questions asked of each candidate are reproduced as submitted to the League.  Candidates' statements are presented as submitted. Answers will be cut off if they exceed a word limit, if present. Direct references to opponents are not permitted. The order of the candidates is random and changes daily. Candidates who did not respond are not listed on this page.