Jake Miller, a high school teacher and chairman of the Common Cause Pennsylvania campaign for full public financing of elections takes the occasion of Fair Elections Action Week to make this argument in favor of a public financing system for judicial races like North Carolina has, and New Mexico recently passed.Public support for such a program has been quite high in the past:A poll by the North Carolina Center for Voter Education revealed that 78 percent believed campaign contributions influence judges' decisions ''a great deal'' or ''some.'' Nearly a decade ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court conducted a similar survey with even more resounding results: 85 percent of Pennsylvanians favored restricting campaign contributions to judges to $1,000; 80 percent favored limiting the amount that judicial candidates could spend; and 77 percent favored providing public financing to judicial candidates that refuse campaign contributions. But the Legislature refused to respond.Of course in the intervening period spending on judicial races nationwide has skyrocketed and increased attention to the matter has meant increased interest by states in adopting a North Carolina Clean Elections model of judicial public financing.