Judges' costs

North Carolinians can argue all day long about whether judges should be elected, but given that elections are what we have, it's good to know that the state is doing some things right. Exhibit A: Public campaign financing has reduced the urge, or need, among candidates for statewide judicial posts to raise money from private contributors.

It never was any surprise that those contributors tended to be people with various dogs in the fight -- ideological, financial, what have you. When a judge presides over a case in which one party is represented by an attorney who was a big contributor to that very judge, how could that pass the smell test?

It couldn't, which is why the General Assembly instituted public financing for candidates for the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. That system faced a legal challenge. But the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond upheld the law. Now the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to intervene.

What this amounts to is a vote of confidence in the legislature's good judgment, and a guarantee that judicial public financing can continue here.