Tim raises important critical questions about the election or appointment of the Ramsey County Sheriff.
Right now I am unable to answer Tim's questions objectively, having been at the 5th Ward (?) debate last fall, where Ramsey County Bob Fletcher seized the questions cards and threatened people in the audience. I think if the Ramsey County Sheriff was an appointed position, there is a strong likelihood Fletcher would not be still holding his job now, but who can say for certain. I am reminded of the debate that took place during the Watergate Crisis. Many people said that if America had a Parliamentary System, like Britain, Canada or Israel, where the opposition party can call for a "Vote of Confidence", Nixon would have been removed from office probably at least a year earlier and the nation spared a great deal of anguish by the "Watergate Crisis". The counter-argument was that Parliamentary Systems tend to be less stable, that elections are more frequent and there is more political chaos. Eventually the system worked in America and Nixon was removed from office and the argument faded into history. But one point, I do feel qualified to comment on, is the election of Judges. Over the years, very few Judges have been removed by election, but when they have been, at least from my experience, it was long overdue. Over a decade ago, there was a Hennepin County Judge, who was just downright rude and nasty. After he received an "unfavorable rating" from the Hennepin County Bar Association, which was well deserved, he lost at his next election. Similarly, here in Ramsey County, over the past 10 to 12 years, at least two Judges were removed from the bench for inappropriate behavior. One Judge, (who was rumored to come back from lunch with alcohol on his breath) frequently put down lawyers who appeared before him, even calling female lawyers "lawyerettes". He was defeated at his next election. I believe that the removal of these Judges was for the public good, in that while their behavior did not rise to a level that the Board of Judicial Conduct should have removed them, their replacements on the bench are much better. That said, I think the movement, particularly by the Republican Party, to politicize Judicial elections, by allowing Judges to seek party endorsements and speak out on issues, would be a disaster for judicial independence in Minnesota. You would quickly have Republican pro-life judicial candidates blasting Democratic pro-choice judges in battles not dissimilar to State House or State Senate races. Should that day ever come to pass here, (which the Republican Party is now trying to do, Greg Wensel has another case going to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals), I would then support appointment of Judges for life or to a set age like 70. These thoughts and $3.25 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Dan Dobson Summit Hill - Saint Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Tim Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The county sheriff is going to be MORE accountable > if appointed > >by the board? I think that kind of idea is usually > called nonsense. > > Elections and appointments are both means of holding > a public > official accountable, however they have different > strengths and > weaknesses. Obviously, we don't want to elect every > city or county > officer. So, the question then becomes - how do we > best select and > hold our Sheriff accountable? > > Some people claim that the Sheriff is much like the > St. Paul Chief of > Police. Why do we elect the Sheriff, but appoint the > chief of Police? > Why is one system better for one job, but the other > better for the > other? Or, is one system better than the other - and > we just got it > wrong in either the case of the Sheriff or the Chief > of Police. > > I'd like to ask Chris (or anyone else - that favors > an elected > Sheriff) why they think that elections are > specifically important for > the Sheriff? If its useful, please compare the > Sheriff and SPPD Chief > of Police. > > Personally, I can't imagine electing the chief of > Police - and don't > fully appreciate the justification for electing a > Sheriff. Its > personally very difficult for me to hold the Sheriff > accountable > through the ballot box, because I know almost > nothing about what he > actually does or whether or not he is doing a good > job at it. > > Anyone.....? > > NOTE: I suppose that this argument is similar to the > one about > electing Judges. Is the public really able and > informed enough to > hold these officials accountable or select the best > person for the > job? Is it really appropriate to inject election > politics into these > important policy positions? > > Thanks, > > Tim Erickson > Hamline Midway > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > ================================================= > Tim Erickson http://www.politalk.com > St. Paul, MN - USA 651-643-0722 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] iChat/AIM: stpaultim > ================================================= > > > _____________________________________________ > To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _____________________________________________ > NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your > password - visit: > http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul > > Archive Address: > http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/ > _____________________________________________ To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
