Here are four editorials published over the last week in Missouri, courtesy of the Associated Press.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 10
Check out ranking of judges before you vote
One of the best things about Missouri’s judicial system is the Non-Partisan Court Plan, known more commonly as the Missouri Plan.
The plan is the state’s constitutional system for selecting appellate judges and trial judges in the city of St. Louis, St. Louis County, Kansas City, Clay County, Platte County and Greene County. It was voted into operation in 1940, is relatively transparent, and reduces political interference.
It also gives voters the final say about retention of judges whose appointments are based mostly on merit. If all works as it should, the plan is a gift to Missourians. The only caveat is that voters must use it in order for the plan to work the way it should.
The Missouri Bar’s recommendation on Wednesday that voters remove St. Louis County Judge Dale W. Hood is a case in point. This is the second time the bar has evaluated Judge Hood and determined that he is not worthy of retention.
The judge was appointed to the bench in 2005 and was among 51 judges who were evaluated by the bar for the state’s Nov. 6 ballot. He was the only judge who received a negative report, and was also the only judge who got a negative ranking from the bar the first time he was up for retention in 2008.
Voters kept him anyway.
They also kept St. Louis County Associate Circuit Judge Judy P. Draper, who was not recommended for retention in 2010 by the bar’s Judicial Performance Evaluation Committee. Judges Hood and Draper are the only judges who have not been recommended for retention since the bar put into place in 2008 the evaluation process it currently uses.
Voters have banished only two judges, both of them from the Kansas City area, since the Missouri Plan was implemented.
Maybe keeping the judges despite their negative ratings by the bar is as it should be – but, maybe not. In their lifetimes, most voters will not have personal contact with judges and won’t be able to formulate their own impressions. Rather than relying on any of a variety of useless strategies (nice name, eeny, meeny, miny, moe … ) before deciding to check the yay or nay box on the ballot for judicial retention, voters ought to look at the nifty array of information the state bar has made available to help with the decision-making.
There’s a lot to think about regarding judicial retention. First off, there are a lot of judges. Local voters will be asked in November whether to retain Supreme Court Judge George W. Draper III, four judges on the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District in St. Louis, 10 St. Louis Circuit Court judges and 14 St. Louis County judges, including Judge Hood.
The showmecourts.org website, which is where the bar puts the evaluation information, has a breakdown of scores on a variety of topics for each judge. There are lawyers’ rankings and samples of each judge’s written opinions. There are also peer rankings this year, which are part of a pilot project.
As a side note, the bar gets no state money to provide and distribute this information and does so to keep voters informed and to try to continue to keep quality judges on the bench. The rankings are online and also can be found in brochures at libraries, courthouses, seniors centers and in some grocery stores.
Check them out before you vote.
—
Jefferson City News Tribune, Sept. 8
The timing of a recent state audit has a political aroma.
State Auditor Tom Schweich released an audit Wednesday criticizing Gov. Jay Nixon for sticking other state agencies with $1.7 million in bills for costs incurred by his own office, staff and travel.
We don’t defend these practices by the Democratic governor.
But the timing of the Republican auditor’s release – about two months before the November election – smacks of politics.
The audit of Nixon’s office covers a period that began when he took office in January 2009 and continued through 2011.
And findings in the audit largely are “old news.”
We criticized the governor severely when the billing revelations first were disclosed not by a state official, but by The Associated Press.
In this forum on June 4, 2009 – more than three years ago – we described the governor as a “frequent flyer” and “flying freeloader” for his prolific air travel at the expense of other agencies.
We repeated criticism in this forum on July 6, 2010 – more than two years ago – and we commended lawmakers on Feb. 24, 2011, for their efforts to bring greater transparency to the governor’s travel records and expenses.
The response by the governor’s office to the recent audit was disappointing. In a written response, the governor’s office said it “accounts for its operational costs in a manner that properly reflects the nature of the work it performs.”
That strikes us as vague, cavalier government-speak.
But the timing of Schweich’s audit suggests political piling-on – resurrecting a gubernatorial vulnerability for the purpose of firing partisan broadsides.
We encourage our office-holders to avoid campaign mud and reclaim higher ground.
—
The Joplin Globe, Sept. 10
Economic health at home
Much has been written about Joplin’s recovery since the May 22, 2011, tornado. Don’t expect that to end anytime soon.
On Friday, during the 2012 Governor’s Conference on Economic Development at the Governor’s Awards luncheon held in St. Louis, work done post-tornado to keep business doors open was recognized. Joplin was lauded for its efforts in work-force recovery, while Joplin Area Chamber of Commerce President Rob O’Brian was selected as the 2012 Governor’s Career Service in Economic Development Award winner. The first was directly related to the tornado, while O’Brian’s was based on his career contributions to economic development.
The work of both has made a key difference in the way Joplin area businesses have recovered since the tornado.
Almost 560 employers had their businesses demolished or substantially damaged; an additional 400-plus were affected by the loss of utilities, loss of customers or injured employees. More than 5,000 job positions were affected.
Four days after the tornado hit, a business recovery center had been opened at the Joplin chamber office and a website was rebuilt to focus on disaster resources for businesses.
O’Brian spoke during the awards luncheon on Friday, making a presentation of recommendations based on the Joplin Area Chamber of Commerce experience.
“Be prepared to be busier than you ever dreamed possible,” he told the group of state economic leaders.
Those words are still as true today for Joplin as they were almost 16 months ago.
Joplin should rejoice that 86 percent of the businesses destroyed or significantly damaged are open today and that 95 percent of the affected job positions are in place – many of them held even though the business doors had to be temporarily closed.
There are now more than two dozen new employers in the city.
But in order to keep putting one foot in front of the other, land acquisitions for projects outlined by the city’s master developer, Wallace Bajjali, need to become an immediate priority for the expansion of Joplin’s business community. The city is awaiting $8 million in federal Community Development Block Grant money for the project.
Our congratulations to those who have led the way in Joplin’s business recovery. It’s a job that’s only just begun.
—
The Kansas City Star, Sept. 6
Church left hurting from Finn’s failure
The criminal conviction of Bishop Robert Finn sends a clear message to the Catholic Church that those responsible for the safety of children will be held accountable, no matter how high their post in the hierarchy. Yet at the same time, the sentence on one count of failing to report suspicion of child abuse is disconcertingly light: two years of unsupervised probation.
Nevertheless, Finn has the unwanted distinction of becoming the highest-ranking U.S. Catholic official to be convicted in the long-running abuse scandals. Finn said he was “truly sorry for the hurt these events have caused.”
Yet perhaps “these events” could have been avoided had the diocese strictly followed the terms of a settlement it signed four years ago. Yet last May came news that lewd images had been discovered on the computer of a priest, Father Shawn Ratigan, and the diocese had failed to notify authorities for five months.
A key finding in the Finn case was the acknowledgment that he was indeed a mandated reporter under Missouri law, with the duty to report suspicion of abuse.
Finn was also charged with misdemeanor counts in Clay County but agreed to enter a diversion program, thus avoiding prosecution.
The whole imbroglio has not only decimated the church’s credibility but its moral standing. Finn’s conviction is a strong reminder that he must not be allowed to remain in his post as bishop. In legal terms, Finn got off easy. But the church and its hierarchy have been put on notice.