What should we know about those who want to be judges? Coxe and Stemberger debate the issue before the Tallahassee federalist society.

Asking judicial candidates questions about their views on political and social issues is a better way to educate voters about what kind of judge they would be, according to John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council.

But Bar President Hank Coxe said questionnaires, such as those recently sent to Florida judicial candidates by the FFPC and the Christian Coalition, undermine the judiciary's independence and accountability, which in turn undermines democracy.

The two met October 18 at the Tallahassee Federalist Society to debate the use of issue questionnaires in judicial elections. Coxe said the Bar has no position on the questionnaires and the views he presented were his own.

The joint appearance produced a lively debate, including sharp audience questions.

Stemberger, whose group has sued the Judicial Qualifications Commission over its questionnaire (see story, page 1), led off by saying the questionnaires provide accountability and a check on judicial activism.

He said judges must have the independence to make their rulings without fear of financial or political retribution, but must not cross the line from the scholarly interpretation of the law and constitutional issues into making the law.

But voters have no valid way to measure that when they consider judicial candidates, Stemberger added.

"Judicial elections are devoid of any substantive discussion between the candidates on judicial philosophy," Stemberger said. "In the instance of county and circuit court judges, we predominantly elect our judges based on the color of their yard signs or whether their names sound familiar."

While judicial canons in other states have been struck down for prohibiting candidates from giving their views, Florida has a different system. Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct says if judicial candidates give their views on an issue, they may be asked to recuse themselves if that issue comes before them on the bench, he said.

The result was about half of this year's judicial candidates returned the FFPC questionnaire, but at least 90 percent declined to answer the substantive issue questions, Stemberger said, usually citing that canon.

"It is fiction to say judges cannot announce their views on disputed political issues without losing their ability to be fair and impartial," he said. "Judges have opinions. The only question is this: Does it serve the interest of a robust democracy to know those views before the election or know those...