text: California justice weighs in on judicial races - SFGate
  https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/California-justice-weighs-in-on-judicial-races-3196942.php
  Three questions For Ming Chin
  California Supreme Court Justice Ming Chin speaks in a San Francisco courtroom in this May 25, 2004, photo. Justice Chin, recovering from January 2006, skull surgery, will be sidelined from taking the bench during oral arguments for what will be the third month in a row when the justices begin holding public sessions in San Francisco Tuesday, March 7, 2006. While the timing of the 63-year-old Chin's return to the public spotlight is uncertain, his absence from the bench is delaying cases and at times causing lower court judges to fill the vacuum. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma) less
  California Supreme Court Justice Ming Chin speaks in a San Francisco courtroom in this May 25, 2004, photo. Justice Chin, recovering from January 2006, skull surgery, will be sidelined from taking the bench ... more
  With businesses and trial lawyers pouring money into state judicial races around the nation, California Chief Justice Ronald George appointed a Commission for Impartial Courts in 2007 to study judicial elections in California and decide whether changes were needed to promote judicial independence and public confidence in the courts. The commission's chairman, state Supreme Court Justice Ming Chin, spoke to Chronicle reporter Bob Egelko about some of the proposals that the commission is recommending.
  Q: You've proposed requiring Superior Court judges to remove themselves from any case in which they've received at least $1,500 in contributions from either side. Why do we need this rule in a state that hasn't had expensive elections for trial judges?
  A: It's true that big money and special-interest influence have not been big problems in California. But there is no mandatory amount (for judges to disqualify themselves) and we wanted to draw a clear line... We have to make sure our decisions are respected and free of inappropriate influences.
  Q: Another proposal would require Superior Court judges to post, either at the courthouse or online, the names of everyone who has contributed at least $100 to the judge's campaign, and tell everyone who appears before the judge where the list can be found. Could this have the unintended effect of adding to public suspicions that judges are biased in favor of contributors?
  A: It's possible that somebody will see that list and say, "Maybe I should get on that list." But judges are already required to report those contributions to the Fair Political Practices Commission. There should be as much transparency as possible, and it's worth the price (of possibly increasing public suspicion).
  Q: You've also called for judges to play more of a role in improving civics education in public schools, and to get credit toward their own mandatory-education requirements for teaching students about the legal system. How bad is the problem, and can judges do anything about it?
  A: Our task force on public information and education, which included many outstanding educators, reported that civic education was abysmal from K through 12. There is a deep lack of knowledge about our government. (Chin cited Chief Justice George's frequent comment that surveys show more Americans can identify the Three Stooges than the three branches of government.) I met with (state) Superintendent Jack O'Connell. He wants to work with us. Our outreach program (in which the court visits different cities and holds question-and-answer sessions with high school students before hearing cases) has been remarkably successful. They come away from the sessions knowing a lot more about the court system. Many of them say, "You have encouraged us to be lawyers," and I say (to myself), "Oh, no."