Political sniping enlivens Bucks judicial race

After almost a generation of serial snorefests, this year's Bucks County judicial election has been invaded by, of all things, a touch of political intrigue.

Since 1991, the last time a Democrat won a black robe in Bucks, the only variable has been what time the winning Republican would deliver his or her victory speech.

No more.

Already the race has been enlivened by charges of political chicanery. The barking began when county Democratic and Republican leaders struck an agreement to endorse the same slate of candidates - two Republicans and one Democrat - for three judgeships on the May 19 primary ballot.

"The party bosses have rigged the game," said candidate Lawrence Otter, a Democrat who was not endorsed.

"A backroom deal cut by the party bosses," declared First Assistant District Attorney David Zellis, a snubbed Republican candidate.

Proponents say the endorsement removes politics with its bipartisan support of well-qualified candidates. Each contender had a chance to argue his or her case at several screening sessions, they say.

"It made good sense to have a unified front to put three really good people on the bench," said Pat Poprik, vice chair of the Bucks County Republican Committee. "If this is a backroom deal, it has more sunlight on it than any I've ever seen."

Bipartisan endorsements, though informative, are not akin to merit selection, said Shira Goodman, associate director of Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, which advocates an appointed judiciary. "It doesn't remove problems such as having to raise money from lawyers who come before the judges," she said.

Neither is the arrangement unprecedented in Bucks.

In 1991, the parties provoked a similar outcry by jointly endorsing Democrat John J. Rufe and Republican R. Barry McAndrews for judgeships. McAndrews, a former president judge, has retired; Rufe, well-regarded by courthouse lawyers, will retire in December.

Both had been appointed to judgeships by Gov. Robert P. Casey by the time of the election.

Likewise, one of the endorsed candidates this year is already on the bench. Gov. Rendell appointed Republican Wallace H. Bateman Jr. in the fall to fill a vacancy. Bateman, now running for a full 10-year term, "is doing an admirable job," said Democratic Party chair John Cordisco, who agreed to back him.

The other endorsed Republican, Robert O. Baldi, is a veteran trial lawyer and former public defender. "Honored and thrilled" by the endorsement, Baldi dismissed the criticism as "campaign rhetoric" and "sour grapes."

Shortly after the endorsements, Rendell nominated Baldi to fill the unexpired term of Judge Mitchell Goldberg, who was appointed to the federal bench last year.

Baldi's bipartisan endorsement helped ensure the governor's nomination, which still awaits confirmation by the Republican Senate, said State Sen. Charles T. McIlhinney, who submitted Baldi's name.

"There's politics in everything, but you have to fall back on qualifications," McIlhinney (R., Bucks) said. "The governor's reputation is on the line, and my reputation is on the line."

The parties also endorsed Democrat Gary L. Gilman, a former public defender who supervised civil defense work for the state Attorney General's Office before entering private practice. Gilman said his endorsement was based on merit, and he called critics of the process "disingenuous," because all candidates were invited to the screening process.

When Cordisco disclosed the arrangement at the Democrats' Feb. 21 endorsement meeting, "there was such an uproar," lawyer Jahn S. Chesnov said. "It's a good thing that nobody brought tomatoes or rotten bananas."

The gathering calmed down and went along after Cordisco explained the situation.

The most vocal critic of the endorsements has been Zellis. Because of his visible role in many high-profile criminal prosecutions, Zellis is arguably the candidate best known to the public, yet he failed to win an endorsement.

Zellis since has cast himself as "David vs. the two Goliaths," lobbing verbal bombs at the parties' endorsements.

That drew the scorn of Carol Shelly, a former bar association president now running for judge.

"I think bipartisanship has chosen three very qualified people," Shelly said. "I'm not going to act like a petulant child because I didn't happen to be one of them."