thedailytimes.com : Your 24/7 news source

The national election season is going strong, and in Blount County the only contested race is heating up.

The candidates for Blount County Division II Circuit Court Judge have taken aggressive stances as they square off over campaign finance.

Current Division II Circuit Court Judge Mike Meares — a Democrat who was appointed to the seat by Gov. Phil Bredesen in June — has vowed not to accept campaign donations from attorneys, saying “people have the impression that their government is for sale and I want people to know that justice is not for sale.”

Meares’ opponent, Blount County General Sessions Judge David R. Duggan, a Republican, doesn’t believe taking donations from attorneys is a problem. Getting contributions from attorneys “doesn’t affect what I do in the courtroom,” he said. “It never has and it never will.

“There’s no reason not to take money from the legal community,” he said. “I am proud, very proud, of every contribution I have received.”

Meares said he has already turned away “a number” of attorneys who have offered campaign contributions, and has even returned money to one, along with a letter of apology explaining why.

“It puts attorneys in a difficult position when a sitting judge’s political campaign asks for a contribution,” he said, adding he feels there is an even more serious consequence. “It’s not what it tells attorneys, but what it tells the public.”

Duggan said he has received contributions from a number of attorneys “liberals and conservatives; Republicans and Democrats.” But those people aren’t looking for favor in the courtroom — about 75 percent of the contributions from the legal community have “come from attorneys, or judges, who never, or seldom ever, practice in that court (Division II Circuit Court)” — they are looking for change, he said.

“Obviously I believe I would make the best judge,” Duggan said Tuesday. “If I didn’t believe I would make the best judge, I wouldn’t be doing this.”

What the experts say

Judge Alan Glenn, with the Court of Criminal Appeals in Memphis, and chairman of Tennessee’s Judicial Ethics Committee, says people running for judicial office are stuck in a “Catch-22.”

In a perfect world, judges would not know who gave money to their campaign, let alone how much. Those numbers would be handled by the campaign director, he said. But in Tennessee, judicial office seekers are required to certify their campaign financial disclosure statements, and that means looking them over to make sure they are true and accurate.

Based on the Tennessee Code of Judicial Ethics, taking a contribution from a lawyer can be a reason for an attorney — one facing a contributor in front of the elected judge, for example — to ask a judge to disqualify himself or herself. Glenn said he has never seen it — but as an appellate judge, he wouldn’t anyway, he pointed out — but “I would not be surprised if some judges do” recuse themselves based on campaign donations from attorneys.

But there are a multitude of reasons an attorney might ask a judge to be recused from a case and “some are reasonable, some are not,” Glenn said. “It’s grounds (to file a disqualification motion) but there can be disqualification motions filed for real frivolous reasons.”

Allan Ramsaur, executive director of the Tennessee Bar Association, doesn’t see anything wrong with campaign donations from attorneys. In fact, it is quite the norm, he said.

“The rules of judicial conduct certainly permit contributions by lawyers,” he said.
If a person seeking a judgeship decides not to take those kinds of donations in the interest of preserving public faith in the office, that is not a bad thing, Ramsaur said.
“If this judge can run a campaign without that (attorney contributions) then that’s certainly a good thing,” he said.

But that does not mean in the slightest that a judicial candidate taking contributions from attorneys is doing something immoral, unethical or bad at all, he added.
“That shouldn’t be taken as an implied criticism of the other candidate,” he said.

Difference in the numbers

As of Jan. 29, when both judicial candidates turned in their financial disclosure statements to the Blount County Election Commission, there was a large difference in the amount of contributions made to each.

Meares took in a total of $2,160 in campaign contributions — only two, for a total of $340, were from people contributing more than $100.

Duggan, on the other hand, took in $50,750 in campaign contributions — with $41,500 coming from people donating $100 or more. Of that amount, $11,250 came from people listing their occupation as an attorney — attorneys Craig Garrett, David Boyd, Carl McDonald, Robert Goddard and Arthur Goddard each gave $1,000, the maximum allowed by law. Other attorneys who donated to Duggan include: Brent Johnson, Maryville, Robert S. English, Knoxville, Tommy Hindman, Knoxville, Stephen S. Ogle, Maryville, Damon Wooten, Maryville, Duncan V. Crawford, Maryville, Joe H. Nicholson, Maryville, David T. Black, Maryville, Norman Newton, Maryville, L. Lee Kull, Alcoa, Bruce E. Poston, Knoxville, Gary M. Prince, Knoxville, James M. Garner, Maryville, Chris Conner, Maryville, Eugene B. Dixon, Maryville, W. Keith McCord, Knoxville, Jon G. Roach, Knoxville, Robert H. Watson Jr., Knoxville, Ronald C. Leadbetter, Knoxville, Daphne Moffatt, Maryville, and Jason C. Rose, Maryville. The list also includes Blount County Assistant District Attorneys Robert Headrick and Tammy Harrington, and Blount County Public Defender Mack Garner.

Other names of note who contributed to Duggan’s campaign include sitting Blount County Judges W. Dale Young and Mike A. Gallegos, Blount County Sheriff James Berrong and Blount County Mayor, and former U.S. Attorney, Jerry Cunningham.

And for Duggan, that list is something he prides himself on.

“I have a lot of friends in this community who support me,” he said. “I’ve just got a solid base of support.”

The ‘machine’

Meares on the other hand, sees that list — and the number of prominent Republicans included on it — and views it as something different. It’s not just a race against Duggan, Meares said, it’s also a campaign against the “small Republican machine planning to replace him (Duggan)” if his General Sessions Court seat is vacated in the general election.

“Whoever believes that they’re in line to get the appointment ... is obviously going to have a vested interest in contributing to, and supporting, (Duggan’s) campaign,” he said.

And while Meares’ contribution numbers are nowhere near those of Duggan’s, he expects that to change in the months leading up to the November general election. But even if it doesn’t, Meares said he believes the voters will make the decision based on principles, not a candidate’s pocketbook.

“I do not believe that the people of Blount County will allow the election to be bought,” he said. “I don’t think, ultimately, the outcome of the election will be determined by money.”

Thus far, the campaign has been free of mud, and Duggan said the slinging will not start with him. But if there is something that might muddy up the waters, it would be something like “an insinuation that it’s unethical to take a contribution from an attorney,” he said. “There is absolutely no reason for anyone to assume that you’re on the take, or that accepting a contribution will impact your judgment.”