Michigan voters say bias occurs in cases with campaign supporters

LANSING, Michigan—By a three-to-one margin, Michigan voters believe that there is a probability of bias when a judge hears a case involving a major financial supporter of his election campaign, according to a new poll by the Michigan Campaign Finance Network. Eighty-five percent believe that a judge should not hear a case involving such a campaign supporter.

Other findings:

• 93 percent believe that is important that judges are independent of contributors to their campaigns.
• 63 percent believe that campaign contributions affect the decisions judges make, with 31 percent saying campaign contributions make ‘a lot’ of difference. Among self-described political independents, 45 percent said campaign contributions make ‘a lot’ of difference.
• 85 percent said that a judge should disqualify himself from a case that involves a campaign backer who spent $50,000 to support the judge’s election.
• If a judge is asked to disqualify himself from a case for reasons of perceived bias, only seven percent said that the judge in question should have the final say as to whether or not to disqualify himself. 86 percent said that another judge should make the final determination on whether the original judge should be disqualified.
• 96 percent said it is important that all sources of spending in judicial campaigns are publicly disclosed. 80 percent said such disclosure is ‘very important.’

The poll was conducted by phone by Denno-Noor Research for the Michigan Campaign Finance Network from March 9 through March 14, 2009. The poll sample was 600 individuals who said they voted, either in person or by absentee ballot, in the November 2008 election.

Go to the Michigan Campaign Finance Nework website for more details.