[nanny]

There are pros and cons to that.

In Texas I understand the largest funders for judges' campaigns are trial lawyers - that does seem to present a conflict of interest to me, and make way for a lot of skullduggery.

Now an appointed judge has the blight of just being a political - well appointee.

I think maybe appointment with term limits would help, but I don't know how to fix the case of lawyers funding judges' campaigns.

[writmeister]

The trial lawyers are the biggest contributors to the RAT candidates. Unfortunately for them (and fortunately for us), no RAT-statewide judicial candidate has won since 1992. They thought they would have a big year in 2002 and spent extravangantly -- but all their candidates went down to defeat handily (even their so-called "moderate" candidate Margaret Mirabal running with RINO support against our so-called "extreme" candidate Steven Smith).

We are also making progress on the intermediate appellate judiciary winning benches deep in yellow-dog rural Texas which have been previously controlled by the trial lawyers.