The state's Independent Commission on Judicial Reform held a public hearing at West Virginia University's College of Law Monday, focusing specifically on how West Virginia judges are selected. Under the current system, voters elect their judges, much the same as any other politician. The Commission's Honorary Chair, former US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, was elected the same way in her home state of Arizona.

"So, I saw it first-hand," says Justice O'Connor. "I didn't think it was healthy."

Arizona changed its system as O'Connor was leaving the senate for a seat on the bench. Change might not come easily for a state that has gone 35 years without a major judicial review.

"It's a strong tradition in West Virginia to elect both judges and executive officers," WVU Law Professor Robert Bastress explained for the commission. He provided the history of the state's selection process.

Testimony from other states highlighted the issues of adopting a merit-based system of evaluation instead of relying on popular elections. One such model, "The Missouri Plan," combined executive appointments followed up by retention elections. "I've been an appellate level judge for 15 years," says Hon. Laura Denvir Stith, a justice on the Supreme Court of Missouri, "and I've never raised a dime, held a fundraiser, or made a campaign promise. The only promise I have ever made is the one in my oath of office. To uphold the constitution and the laws of the United States, and of the State of Missouri.

Merit-based, or retention, elections have chronically low turnouts, and others made the case for more voter education. Some experts said the public should be completely taken out of the process.

"Voters don't know the candidates," says Norman L. Greene, a national consultant with Schoeman, Updike & Kaufman, LLP in New York. "They just don't. You can't."

Other testimony supported in-depth evaluations of sitting judges, which could help inform the retention elections. The state would survey lawyers, witnesses and others that took part in the legal system.

"For social service personnel, they might get questions about the extent to which they feel that a judge is really interested in procedural justice and protecting the interests of individual litigants," says Dr. Rachael Paine Caufield, with the American Judicature Society, "and whether or not they feel they've been treated with respect in that courtroom.

The full day of testimony came from the state's bar association, academics, business leaders, politicians, and the public. The commission will analyze all of the testimony, along with other studies. They will then make recommendations to the governor on reaching one goal.

"A judicial branch with qualified, intelligent, independent judges, who could, without fear of retribution by the other branches of government make their decisions," as Justice O'Connor described it.

The commission held it's first hearing Aug. 28 on campaign finance at Marshall University. The next hearing is set for September 29 in the capitol building, to discuss judicial organization.

The commission's recommendations could range from proposed legislation to constitutional amendendments. Those findings are due to Gov. Manchin by October 15.