Voting for judges, and against one in particular

Well my ballot is in, and despite traditional practices in Chicago I’ve decided to only vote once this year.

Boy, that ballot sure includes a lot of tedious yes/no votes for judges, doesn’t it? But your correspondent dutifully went through each and every one, using the cheat sheet I printed out from the very helpful, which we recommend. Makes voting for judges slightly less of a waste of time!

Now even if you don’t care to vote for every single judge on the ballot, do take a moment to vote against Robert J. Kowalski. He’s the only judge on the ballot who received a ‘no’ recommendation from every bar association surveyed by Vote for Judges. That includes the bar associations of Cook County and Illinois State, the Chicago Council of Lawyers and the Decalogue Society of Lawyers. (Here’s why they don’t like him, I guess.)

Here is a story by Medill’s Hilary Masell Oswald about judicial elections–do not miss her sidebar at the bottom of the story about how there is no cap on campaign contributions to judges, which seems crazy.

UPDATE … Three more judges to vote against, if you’re so inclined.

— posted by Robert Mentzer


7 Responses to “Voting for judges, and against one in particular”

  1. Belinda Clarke Says:

    Embarrassingly, at age 38, I still rely on my mom for my election day cheat sheet, especially for all of the judges. She does good research and so I go with it. However, very frustrating at my polling place this morning (at 7:00 a.m.) because not only did they only have two electronic booths (maybe that’s normal) but the new paper ballot required some funky pen and they didn’t have enough pens for the number of booths they had. Geez. Off to a good start. But I stuck it out and waited my turn. Because yes, Kowalski needs to go.

  2. Cheryl Says:

    Damn. I wish I would have read this before I voted…

  3. Everybody still voted yes « Medill’s Election Night 2006 Says:

    […] According to, our friend the unqualified judge, Robert J. Kowalski, has garnered basically the same ratio of yes-to-no votes as all the other judges. So much for an informed electorate! […]

  4. Judge Robert J. Kowalski Says:

    It is truly sad that the press misleads the public. In my case they report that ten Bar Associations have found me unqualified(for the first time in 18 years) when in fact I refused to be screened by these groups who then report I am unqualified instead of reporting I refused to complete their screening process. These ten groups use one investigator and refuse to tell the candidates what they have found. Their information is always hearsay. It is unfair to the candidates that the Chicago Bar and numerous Suburban Bar Groups don’t get the same play with the press.
    They, by the way, have found me qualified.

  5. Rob Says:

    Judge Kowalski: Why did you withdraw midway through the bar associations’ screening process? And why do you think the groups should be obligated to “tell the candidates what they have found”? They tell the public what they found.

  6. Nancy E. Kerz Says:

    I wonder who’s (Whose) toes the Honorable Judge Robert Kowalski stepped on beside the screening process episode?

  7. Armando Villa Says:

    Judge Kowalski is a racist and a dangerous man. On July 30, 2007, he came to my house, trespassed and threatened to hurt me with a weapon. I called the police and they did nothing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: