CHARLESTON — The head of the Senate Finance Committee warned that the governor’s proposal to publicly finance state Supreme Court races could be derailed by concerns over the fees it would charge.
Senate Finance Chairman Walt Helmick, a Pocahontas County Democrat, questioned whether his committee would consider the legislation after it advanced late Monday from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The bill would offer public funds to candidates for the two court seats up in 2012. Last year’s study of the judiciary recommended a pilot program as a way to reduce the perceived influence of campaign cash over the courts.
Helmick invoked the recession-weakened economy to criticize the measure’s partial reliance on fees.
As endorsed by Senate Judiciary, it would charge $20 to people who file for divorce and all parties in class actions upon settlement or judgment, and on other kinds of circuit court filings not involving domestic relations. It would also add $10 to magistrate court civil filings, charge lawyers up to $75 annually and create a new, $100 fee for non-domestic relations appeals and petitions at the Supreme Court.
Other sources would include a $1 million transfer from the fund for the state’s purchasing card system, donations and civil penalties from violations of the program’s rules.
Gov. Joe Manchin’s Independent Commission on Judicial Reform had suggested court fees when it touted a public financing pilot project as one way to shore up confidence in the courts. The commission’s November report noted that West Virginia’s Supreme Court “appears to be the only court of last resort in the entire country that currently does not assess a filing fee of any sort.”
Fees now include up to $70 for magistrate court lawsuits, $135 for family court divorce petitions and $145 for most kinds of circuit court filings.
Manchin has met with Helmick to discuss his objections to the bill, said Matt Turner, a spokesman for the governor.
“He certainly understands Sen. Helmick’s concerns about this,” Turner said Tuesday. “But the governor also hopes that the senator understands how the public in West Virginia feel about the fairness of the process, and the influence of special interests.”
The study commission’s report cited the rapid influx of campaign cash in the state’s recent Supreme Court races. Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the commission’s honorary chair, is an outspoken critic of money in judicial elections.
West Virginia’s court contests received national attention last year when the U.S. Supreme Court removed state Justice Brent Benjamin from hearing an appeal brought by Massey Energy Co. The coal producers chief executive, Don Blankenship, had spent at least $3 million to help Benjamin win his court seat in 2004.
Supporters of Manchin’s bill unveiled a poll of 600 West Virginia voters Monday that they said showed bipartisan support for public financing. That support grew once voters learned of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, they said.
The pilot program would offer public funds to candidates for the two seats on the five-member court up in 2012. Candidates would have to meet a fundraising threshold to qualify, and then abide by the program’s rules. It would offer candidates $200,000 initially for a contested primary and $350,000 for a contested general election. Sizable spending by third parties or nonparticipating candidates would trigger the release of additional funding.
