A look at the heated judicial elections in other states should convince Kansas lawmakers to do away with partisan elections in the 14 state judicial districts that still use them.

An unseemly situation in Illinois makes a strong case against the partisan election of judges, a system that still exists in many parts of Kansas. Although the Kansas Legislature has been asked several times to mandate an appointment system statewide, legislators have resisted that move.

The current election in Illinois might be enough to make them change their minds.

A nasty race for a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court is expected to top the record $1.3 million spent in a 2002 race for a seat on the court. The heated race apparently is being fed by a pending appeal by tobacco giant Philip Morris of a judge’s order to pay $10.1 billion in damages for misleading smokers. The Illinois Supreme Court is due to take up the appeal next year, after the new justice is sworn in.

On one side, are the supporters of Republican Lloyd Karmeier who decry excessively large awards in personal injury, malpractice and class-action lawsuits. Among them is the Illinois State Chamber of Commerce which paid for a TV ad that claimed “predatory trial lawyers” are driving away jobs and doctors and that “sharks in fancy suits are getting rich at our expense.”

On the other side is Democrat Gordon Maag, an Illinois appeals court judge, who is reaping big contributions from plaintiffs’ attorneys. “The money is flowing and the mud is starting to fly,” said Cindi Canary, director of the nonpartisan Illinois Campaign for Political Reform.

Illinois isn’t the only place where such battles are occurring. Similar fights are taking place in Alabama, Mississippi and West Virginia. According to an Associated Press report, $29 million was spent in 2002 in state Supreme Court races nationwide, most of it coming from trial lawyers and business groups.

How can such a judiciary possibly maintain its independence? How can judges maintain the highest ethical standards when they know that decisions they make not only will influence votes but will affect the donor money streams they need to be re-elected?

Kansas is extremely fortunate to have a system of governor appointment for its Supreme Court and state Court of Appeals. However, district judges still are elected in 14 of the state’s 31 judicial districts. Douglas County is one of the 17 that uses an appointment system under which a nominating commission forwards names to the governor who makes the appointments. The names of the appointed judges then are put on the general election ballot every four years to allow voters to decide whether they should be retained. The system buffers judges from undue outside influence but gives voters an avenue to remove a judge they believe is negligent or unqualified.

Kansas has done a far better job than many states of structuring its judicial system, but it could make the system even better by requiring all of its judicial districts to do away with partisan elections and adopt an appointment system. Kansas lawmakers need only look at the nasty political battles being waged in other states to understand the importance of taking this action.