Washington has been debating the idea of adopting a Clean Elections-style public financing program for judicial elections. Though it looks like the idea, proposed by Governor Christine Gregoire, has stalled for now in the legislature, lawmakers would do well to read this Seattle Post-Intelligencer op-ed by Judge Wanda Bryant, who has participated in North Carolina's judicial public financing program and values the impartiality running under such a system gives her. North Carolina has had public financing of judicial elections available for the last two election cycles, and it's proved quite popular. Bryant underscores the connection between an impartial judiciary and a campaign finance system that allows judges to run for office without having to collect money from those with business before the court: Our country's judicial system exists so those appearing before the court are able to receive a fair and impartial hearing, with decisions being decided based solely on the evidence and the law. However, with millions of dollars flowing into judicial races -- and those giving money often appearing in front of those judges -- one begins to wonder about the independence of an elected judiciary. Discussions are under way to bring judicial public financing to Washington. As a participant in the system and with more than 20 years of legal experience, I fully support judicial public financing.