
League of Women Voters of Blount County 2006 Candidate Survey
Name: David R. Duggan Phone: 865-273-5523
Candidate for General
Sessions Judge, Division IV
Please
write your answers in the space provided or use a separate sheet, and return
your survey in the enclosed stamped envelope. It is very important that you
write legibly. Please consider
e-mailing your completed survey by requesting an electronic survey at rderycke@bellsouth.net
The
League of Women Voters will acknowledge receipt of your completed survey.
I. Qualifications and experience:
B.A., highest honors, Phi Beta Kappa,
M.A.,
J.D., honors,
1 year, General Sessions Judge
17 years, private practice
Director, Secretary, past President, Alcoa City
Schools Foundation
Director and past President, Alcoa Youth Baseball
Chairman, Administrative Board, Alcoa First United
Chairman, District Board of Trustees, Maryville
District, United
Director,
Member, Alcoa Heritage Committee
Member, Alcoa Kiwanis Club
Member, Sons of the Revolution
Member, Federalist Society
Past Chairman, Vice Chairman, Treasurer,
Co-Author, Coach O: The Glory Days of Alcoa
Basketball
(Note—I’m uncertain of dates served.)
None
1. Fairness
2. Impartiality
3. Consistency
With respect to these leadership skills and
qualities, they should not be unique, but should reflect the qualities of any
judge.
II. Questions about your understanding of the office you
are seeking:
1. Fair and impartial resolution of legal disputes
2. Efficient administration of other legal matters, e.g., estates
3. To instill public confidence in our legal system
SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT
III. Positions on specific issues of importance in
SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT
A.
Means for insuring the fair and
respectful treatment of all
B.
Promotion of greater diversity in our hired and appointed government
officials and employees
C.
Reconciling the potentially competing interests of growth/development
and adequate infrastructure in our county, including the application of the
Hunter Growth Strategy
D.
The environmental impact of development and/or non-attainment status
with the EPA
E.
Identifying and resolving conflicts of interest of public officials
F.
The consolidation of:
1. city and county schools
2. city and county government
3. or a feasibility study on consolidation
G.
Health care
IV. Questions
for CANDIDATES FOR JUDGE: Use a separate sheet to
answer these questions.
That is primarily the responsibility of law
enforcement and the executive branch of government, but under Canon 3(B) (2)
and (3) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, a judge shall not be swayed by
partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism; and a judge shall
require order and decorum in proceedings before the judge
That is primarily a question to be dealt with by the
legislative branch of government. A
judge applies the law made by others.
Under Canon 3(B) (4) and (8), a judge shall be patient, dignified and
courteous to litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals
in an official capacity; and a judge shall dispose of all judicial matters
promptly, efficiently, and fairly.
ATTACHED STATEMENT
JOINT STATEMENT OF
INCUMBENT JUDGES
Blount County Judges, W. Dale Young, D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., William R. Brewer, Jr., William Terry Denton, and David R. Duggan, have issued a joint statement pertaining to response to questionnaires which solicit the Judges’ opinions on political and legal issues.
The Judges have stated that while they understand the desire of voters to be informed and to know where candidates stand on given issues, pursuant to Canon 5 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, candidates for judicial office are directed not to make pledges or promises of conduct in office other than the faithful and impartial performance of the duties of the office, and further they are instructed not to make statements that commit or appear to commit the candidate with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the court.
The Judges have noted that their personal opinions about issues should never enter into their decisions, but rather they have the duty to fairly and impartially apply the law that is made by others, be it legislators or other policymakers.
Accordingly, the Judges have indicated that in responding to any tendered questionnaires, and with respect to solicitation of their opinions on legal and political issues, the Judges will respectfully decline to publicly respond to such inquiries.
In issuing this statement, the Judges acknowledge the ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, which opinion holds that ethical prohibitions against a candidate for judicial office stating his or her positions on political and legal issues are unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
In response to that opinion, however, the Tennessee Supreme Court has issued an Order which nevertheless declines to make any changes in the express provisions of Canon 5. Rather, the Tennessee Supreme Court has only adopted a new Comment upon that Canon. While the Court has acknowledged the White decision, it then reiterates that “Some speech restrictions are indispensable to maintaining the integrity, impartiality and independence of the judiciary,” and “The State has a compelling interest in enforcing these restrictions.” Second, the Comment specifically addresses the receipt of questionnaires and warns judicial candidates to proceed with “caution” if those candidates “choose” to answer. Third, the Comment warns candidates that to take positions on issues “might constitute pledges, promises or commitments,” which prohibition specifically was not addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court in White.
With respect to the latter component of the new Comment, it is noted that the U.S. Supreme Court, in White, has specifically held that, “there is almost no legal or political issue that is unlikely to come before a judge of an American court, state or federal, of general jurisdiction.”