e y e on a r kansas
Editorial n Early voting for the Nov. 2 general election begins Oct. 18. Here are more of the Times’ recommendations: CIRCUIT JUDGE TIM FOX for the Arkansas Supreme Court. He’s ruled wisely and fearlessly in tough cases, including his finding that a state rule prohibiting homosexual parents from serving as foster parents was unconstitutional. The Religious Right is pushing for his opponent. SHANE BROADWAY for lieutenant governor. An experienced, competent and forward-looking legislator, Broadway is probably over-qualified for this office, but term limits are forcing him out of the legislative branch. His opponent believes that health care is too cheap and plentiful; he says he’ll sue to put a stop it. PAT O’BRIEN for secretary of state. Though given to goofiness, like book reports for employees, he seems to have brought honesty and efficiency to the Pulaski County circuit clerk’s office. His opponent is best known for padding his legislative expense account. DEBBIE MURPHY for state representative, District 31. Public-spirited and reasonable, she’s opposed by a right-wing ideologue. JOHN W. WALKER for state representative, District 34. The state’s foremost civil rights warrior, he will at the least make legislative sessions livelier. SHERIFF DOC HOLLADAY for sheriff. Cool-headed and cooperative, he’s dealt with Pulaski County’s shortage of jail beds about as well as could be. The Times previously announced its support for these candidates: GOV. MIKE BEEBE for governor. SEN. BLANCHE LINCOLN for United States senator. JOYCE ELLIOTT for United States representative, Second District. Three proposed constitutional amendments are on the ballot. All were referred by the legislature. Issue No. 1 would establish a constitutional right to hunt and fish. Proponents say that such an amendment is needed to head off legislation that would restrict hunting and fishing rights. Animal- rights groups have promoted such legislation. Ten states have established a right to hunt and fish; two more have established a right to fish. Our view is that this is not the sort of thing that belongs in an already cluttered constitution. What’s next? A right to jog? A right to golf? Vote NO. Issue No. 2 is a complex and far-reaching proposition that would raise the interest rate that can be charged by retailers, remove entirely the interest limit on government bonds, and provide a new way for government agencies to finance bonds for energy-efficiency projects. We might be able to support one or two of its aims if each was voted on separately, but not this confused hodge-podge. Vote NO. Issue No. 3 would make it easier for the state to issue generalobligation bonds to help industrialists build new plants. We’re not totally convinced of the need. No recommendation.
201 East Markham Street, 200 Heritage Center West, P.O. Box 34010, Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Home page: http://www.arktimes.com • E-mail: arktimes@arktimes.com Publisher Alan Leveritt editor
editorial assistant
special projects
Max Brantley
John Tarpley
Michelle Miller, Manager
MANAGING Editor
photographer Brian Chilson
senior account executive
Leslie Newell Peacock
contributing Editor
advertising art director Mike Spain
account executives
Mara Leveritt
associate editors
Assistant art director
David Koon Bob Lancaster Gerard Matthews Doug Smith
lifestyle editor Lindsey Millar
editorial art director Kai Caddy
Patrick Jones
graphic designer Rafael Méndez
Tiffany Holland
Devon Dennis Erik Heller Katherine Smith Angie Wilson
Real Estate Sales Executive
Automotive Advertising Manager Heather Baker
Advertising coordinators Roland R. Gladden Mikaltodd Wilson
IT director
Robert Curfman
circulation director Anitra Hickman
Tiffany Holland
controller
Sheryl Kee
Real Estate Advertising Assistant
billing/collections
director of advertising
Classified Sales Executive
office manager
production manager
Kelly Lyles
Phyllis A. Britton
Challis Muniz
Weldon Wilson Linda Phillips
Angie Fambrough
production manager Ira Hocut (1954-2009)
FOR SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE CALL: (501) 375-2985
24 october 14, 2010 • ARKANSAS TIMES
Brian chilson
Endorsements II
DELTA BLUES: Grady Champion on the main stage at Helena.
Held in contempt n Among the important elections this year is a race for the Arkansas Supreme Court between Appeals Court Judge Karen Baker and Pulaski Circuit Judge Tim Fox. Judicial ethics rules being what they are, it’s hard for candidates to differentiate themselves. Both candidates have experience and records with laudable decisions; Baker has a marginally better reversal rate. Baker has also demonstrated a strong empathy for equal treatment of women, worth mentioning in a state where more than a century of judicial and political paternalism lingers. Baker also authored an important ruling that put the brakes on a huge power plant in western Arkansas. Now the “but” — my experience on a case when Baker sat as a chancellor in Conway in 1997. The issue was a divorce case involving one of the most powerful men in Conway, Charles Morgan, the leader of Acxiom Corp. The divorce case, which the Times was covering, touched on corporate financial issues. When Morgan moved to close the record in the case, I filed an objection. The judge never acknowledged my motion. Perhaps influenced by the public interest in the case, Morgan moved to settle the divorce case. He and his wife came to terms in an order signed barely a week after my open court motion. The file remained sealed. I asked Judge Baker to open it. She said my request was moot, though, by law, it was not. The legal offense, in my view, was that the judge sealed the entire file, even though the hearing that Morgan feared might reveal sensitive information never was held. The judge sealed the boilerplate original divorce pleading. She sealed her final divorce decree. You can look through tens of thousands of divorce cases in Arkansas and not find a single one handled with the secrecy Baker ordered in this case. I contested her finding of mootness. The judge
Max brantley max@arktimes.com
ignored my pleading for five months. Her staff would not talk to me about the status of my motion. After yet another letter reminding her of her duty to rule, she finally relented. She brusquely dismissed the open court motion, more than a year after it had been filed. She said there was little value in hearing evidence in private if the order that resulted could be open to public scrutiny. She said further that the initial pleading and the final divorce decree in this case “do not concern any public interest and at the request of all litigants should remain private.” So the law, as interpreted by a future Supreme Court justice, is that anybody seeking and receiving a divorce is entitled to total secrecy if they ask. The case is of no public interest. Other issues have arisen in this race. Both candidates have reached out for partisan support, including money, for a non-partisan job. More troubling has been the work of Baker’s supporters to criticize Fox for his landmark ruling that a church-driven state effort to prevent gay people from being foster parents was unconstitutional. With a related case pending on adoption by unmarried couples, the unavoidable inference is that Baker’s backers believe she is unfriendly to this modest advancement in human rights. Maybe that’s not so. For my part, Baker’s preference for secrecy in a case that involved a local bigshot is enough. Open court is a bedrock of our system. It encourages fairness through accountability. A ruling against open court isn’t a recommendation for promotion.