ELECTING JUDGES IN TEXAS (Research Paper Sample)

ELECTING JUDGES IN TEXAS Students’ Name Affiliate University ELECTING JUDGES IN TEXAS Various governments have the different method to select their judges; a good example is the State of Texas. The state majorly practices partisan election for its judges. The practice majorly allows different parties to select their judges and later hold an election for the office. It is an impossible way of the election because it makes the judicial service compromised and answerable to the people rather than the law (Champagne, 2006). States with the system majorly focus on power, money and the people because they led to the elected judge’s success. Elections normally comprise of a lot, for example, finances, strategies on winning, identifying the right candidate for the position and the need to reach for the peoples’ support (Elrold, 2013). Finally, such systems majorly focus peoples’ opinion rather than the laws they create and swear to obey and uphold. The judicial service is a paramount body in a democratic country or state. Their duties are to build and preserve the laws and by doing so, electing the judges is a wrong way to defend legislation that governs the country. A better way is by selecting prominent and qualified judges to the office. Selection creates room for fair law interpretation and makes the body independent from political issues. Texas as a state is reluctant to changes and amending the reforms for justice and law. The system does not pay attention to the everyday citizens needs but focuses on the profits and gains from corruption and massive sponsors for the election (Champagne, 2006). Awareness of acts such as corrupt judges who deliver unfair judgment is an appropriate action that will open several ways to amend the system. It might also create a path for the adoption of Judicial reforms on the selection creating fair judgement to the society. The process of establishing, constituting and implementing a law the duty of the judges, but the problem is on how to make sure these laws are fair to the citizens of the state. Texas partisan procedure is one that entails so much. The involvement of donors creates room for politics; politics draws various boundaries to the society and its consequences are usually great. In the policy one team usually wins while the other fails and the methods used in achieving such victories are always unorthodox (Phillips, 2008). The solution is to make the judicial department independent. Independent from politics is the only way to abandon election and adopt selection. The creation of an independent body to select capable judges to govern the decision making on law and order in the state. It is hard to change the system overnight; chaos might erupt. Knowledge and information are the keys to the new dawn of the judiciary. But for it to be a success the possibility of considering the citizens will boost the movement. Free, media is also an added advantage to convey the information and start the campaign, but several conflictions might occur. The various parties involved in the election for office might not support the idea and encourage their supporters to ignore the movement; in short it is hard to control the people. Donor parties too are usually difficult to handle because all they focus on is power and greed (Brace & Boyea, 2008). A much better way is to select a beacon whose primary goal is to unite the people or change the rules and regulations that govern the elections. Adopting theories on achieving the restoration selection is a cumbersome process of analysis and focusing on the prior systems. A better theory is by taking the merit approach; its commission based structure makes it more affordable and adaptable. It structures majorly a committee selected by both lawyers and the governor to screen and choose the most highly-qualified applicants. The committee comprises of lawyers and civilians with the authority to investigate and review the candidates, and later an elected official appoints them. The structure creates no room for politics but academic and work proficiency (Phillips, 2008). The goal is to provide the best candidates who have the knowledge, experience and knowhow on the systems operation. Awareness of the problem is a start, with the rise of corruption in the chambers the public notification might lead to turning the wheels of electing judges. Though a risky plan, the people knowing of the unjustified deeds might bring caution to the society to change the system. Step by step change is a better solution, and the best is the creation of judiciary reforms. These changes maintain the primary purpose of a court in the state. A justice system major role is protecting and advancing the rule of law in a democratic society; because of these, the judges should be held accountable for their actions (Bowers, 2003). Their importance to the society makes them vulnerable in the case of applying judgment using people opinions rather than the law created to govern the state. The reforms assure the academic and experience qualification of the judges occupying the office. Electing judges in the past is associated with politics, chaos, and corruption. Politics is a dirty game aiming to oppress the weak and gain the wealthy and powerful. Most of the donor firms of the judges during the election are politicians, and their pu...