Let's have real real judicial change, David Schenck

David Schenck, the presiding judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals, and elected there with the help of Kenny Boy Paxton, wants real, actual campaign finance reform in judicial races. Contra Kuff, and with the likes of former Texas Supreme Court chief justice Tom Phillips, I think that these reforms, if enacted, would perhaps be more than a nothingburger but not much more. With Phillips, we need nonpartisan retention elections. Having grown up in New Mexico and spent a slice of journalism time there, I know how these work. 

For those who don't?

When there's a mid-term or post-retention election judicial vacancy, the governor fills the seat with a replacement. Next regular general election cycle, there is, IIRC, partisan primaries in the duopoly parties, and third parties nominating by convention should they want to contest. I know there's a partisan general election.

Every four (district), six (appeals) or eight (NM supreme court) election cycle after that, there's a retention election. The judge runs against their record, with major issues compiled by the state commission on judicial conduct. A four-sevenths majority, or 57 percent and change, is required to remain in office.

This, contra Schenck's ideas, would of course require constitutional amendment, not just run of the mill legislation. Nonetheless, if one wants real change, there it is. (None of this excludes Schenck's campaign finance ideas for judges, of course.)