Jessica A. Levinson's piece was largely spot on. ("Why voters shouldn't be electing judges," Opinion, May 8)
Most judicial candidates do not provide much information about their experience, education or background to the public. Using information from bar associations and the League of Women Voters can help voters make more informed choices in judicial elections, but the electorate usually doesn't bother to make any effort to find this information before casting their ballots.
Recall the election of the "not qualified" rated Lynn Diane Olson in 2006; her primary occupation was owning a bagel shop.
That said, there is a place for judicial elections. The appointment process can be slow, resulting in insufficient judicial staff to fill vacancies. With the fiscal contraction of our judicial system, we need help in filling judicial vacancies so the reduced number of courtrooms we do have can provide access to justice.
Levinson has addressed one of my longtime grievances: voting for judges.
I decided a long time ago to just skip this portion of my ballot. How in the world would the average voter know which judges are qualified and which should not even be allowed to practice law?