Does Money Play Too Big Of A Role In Texas Judicial Elections Comments
From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
 in Texas |
| |
This article does not contain the most recently published data on this subject. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
| |
| Campaign finance |
|---|
| Campaign finance portal |
| Campaign finance for political candidates |
| Campaign finance for ballot measures |
| Judicial selection overview |
| Campaign finance agencies |
 |
| Note: This page is not intended to serve as a manual. Individuals who are interested in running for a judicial office should contact their state election agencies for more information about specific filing processes and requirements. |
Candidates for judicial offices in Texas must adhere to the state's campaign finance laws. These laws regulate the amounts and sources of money given or received for political purposes; in addition, campaign finance laws stipulate disclosure requirements for political contributions and expenditures.
HIGHLIGHTS
The laws and regulations that apply to judicial campaigns may differ from those that apply to candidates for political office. To learn more about campaign finance requirements for other candidates, see this article.
Judicial elections overview
Judges in Texas compete in partisan elections during even-numbered years. The state holds primary elections, runoff elections, and general elections.
Methods of judicial selection vary across the United States. In general, there are five main methods of judicial selection:
- Partisan elections: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot alongside a label designating political party affiliation.
- Nonpartisan elections: Judges are elected by the people, and candidates are listed on the ballot without a label designating party affiliation.
- Legislative elections: Judges are selected by the state legislature.
- Gubernatorial appointment: Judges are appointed by the governor. In some cases, approval from the legislative body is required.
- Assisted appointment, also known as merit selection or the Missouri Plan: A nominating commission reviews the qualifications of judicial candidates and submits a list of names to the governor, who appoints a judge from the list. After serving an initial term, the judge must be confirmed by the people in a yes-no retention election to continue serving.[1]
Some states also use a mix of these methods. For example, appellate court judges in the state of New York are chosen by assisted appointment, but the state's trial court judges are chosen in partisan elections.
Before the mid-1800s, nearly all states admitted to the Union selected their judges by gubernatorial appointment with legislative confirmation, though some opted to select judges by legislative vote alone. In 1832, Mississippi became the first state to implement partisan judicial elections. In 1873, Cook County, Illinois, became the first jurisdiction in the United States to implement nonpartisan judicial elections. In 1940, Missouri became the first state to adopt the assisted appointment method; since then over thirty states have followed suit, using some form of retention elections at some level of their judiciary.[2] [3]
-
- See also: Judicial elections and Judicial selection in the states
Contribution limits and other restrictions
Corporations and labor unions are prohibited from making any contributions to state and local party organizations, candidates, candidate committees, and political action committees in support of or opposition to a candidate.[4]
Texas limits the sizes of contributions depending on the office being sought, as well as the size of the district the candidate is running in. For statewide offices, a judicial candidate may accept a contribution of up to $5,000 from a person. Candidates for appellate courts, district courts, statutory county courts, or statutory probate courts may accept $5,000 if the district population is more than 1,000,000, $2,500 if the population is between 250,000 to one million, and $1,000 if the population is less than 250,000.[5]
In addition to the limits on individual contributions, candidates have an aggregate contribution limit they may not exceed. For statewide judicial offices, the limit is $300,000. The limit is $75,000 for a candidate for chief justice or justice of a court of appeals if the population of the judicial district is more than one million, and $52,500 if the population is less than one million. For a candidate for judge of a district court, a statutory county court, or a statutory probate court, the limit is $52,500 if the district's population is over 1,000,000, $30,000 if the population is between 250,000 and one million, and $15,000 if the population is less than 250,000.[5]
Special restrictions are placed on contributions from law firms and individuals affiliated with law firms. According to the Texas Ethics Commission, in any one election, a judicial candidate may not accept contributions of more than $50 from "a member of a law firm's restricted contributor class if the total of all contributions already accepted from members of the law firm's restricted contributor class" exceeds certain limits. This limit equals $30,000 for a statewide judicial candidate. The limit is also $30,000 for appeals court, district court, statutory county court, statutory probate courts if the district's population is more than 1,000,000. The limit is $15,000 if the district's population is between 250,000 and 1,000,000. The limit is $6,000 if the district's population is less than 250,000.[5]
Reporting requirements
Judicial candidates in Texas must file semi-annual reports as well as pre-election reports.
The first semi-annual report covers all activity from January 1 (or the date on which the candidate committee formed) up to June 30. The second report covers July 1 to December 31. These reports are due July 15 of the election year and January 15 of the following year. Pre-election reports are due 30 days and eight days before an election.[4]
For contributions exceeding $50, a committee must report the name and address of the contributor. For expenditures exceeding $100, a committee must report the name and address of the recipient, as well as the purpose of the expenditure.[6]
Year-specific reporting dates
2016
The table below lists campaign finance report filing deadlines for judicial candidates in Texas in 2016.
| Campaign finance reporting deadlines in Texas, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Report | Reporting period | Filing deadline |
| 2016 first semi-annual report | January 1 - June 30 | July 15, 2016 |
| 2016 second semi-annual report | July 1 - December 31 | January 15, 2017 |
| Source: Texas Legislature, "Election Code Chapter 254, Sec. 254.123. SEMIANNUAL REPORTING SCHEDULE FOR COMMITTEE," accessed November 1, 2015 | ||
State agencies
-
- See also: Campaign finance agencies in Texas
In Texas, there is one primary agency involved in campaign finance regulation: the Texas Ethics Commission.
- Texas Ethics Commission
- P. O. Box 12070
- Austin, TX 78711-2070
- Telephone: (512) 463-5800
- Fax: (512) 463-5777
Campaign finance legislation
The following is a list of recent campaign finance bills that have been introduced in or passed by the Texas state legislature. To learn more about each of these bills, click the bill title. This information is provided by BillTrack50 and LegiScan.
Note: Due to the nature of the sorting process used to generate this list, some results may not be relevant to the topic. If no bills are displayed below, no legislation pertaining to this topic has been introduced in the legislature recently.
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Texas campaign finance. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
- Campaign finance requirements in Texas
- Campaign finance agencies in Texas
- Campaign finance requirements for Texas ballot measures
- Texas judicial elections, 2016
External links
- Texas Ethics Commission
Footnotes
- ↑ American Bar Association, "Judicial Selection: The Process of Choosing Judges," June 2008
- ↑ American Judicature Society, "History of Reform Efforts," archived October 2, 2014
- ↑ NYU Press, "The Study of Judicial Elections," accessed December 27, 2014
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Texas Statutes, "Title 15: Regulating Political Funds and Campaigns," accessed April 26, 2016
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Texas Ethics Commission, "Campaign Finance Guide for Judicial Candidates and Officeholders," accessed May 1, 2016
- ↑ Texas Ethics Commission, "Specific-Purpose Committee Campaign Finance Report," accessed December 17, 2015
| v•e | ||
|---|---|---|
| Overview | Federal campaign finance laws and regulations • State-by-state comparison of campaign finance requirements • Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act • Political spending not controlled by candidates or their campaigns • Federal Election Commission • Public financing of campaigns |  |
| Campaign finance for candidates | Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming | |
| Campaign finance for ballot measures | Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming | |
| Campaign finance agencies | Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming | |
 | v•e Austin (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections | What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2021 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government | Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
Does Money Play Too Big Of A Role In Texas Judicial Elections Comments
Source: https://ballotpedia.org/Campaign_finance_requirements_for_Texas_judicial_elections
Posted by: brownlattens.blogspot.com
0 Response to "Does Money Play Too Big Of A Role In Texas Judicial Elections Comments"
Post a Comment