Critics of this blog no doubt are going to blast me for suggesting this a partisan idea.

Too bad. Here goes anyway.

Why in the world do we in Texas have to elect judges on partisan ballots? Believe it nor not, I asked the question when I lived in a heavily Democratic region of the state — in Jefferson County on the Gulf Coast — and I’m asking it yet again.

I’ve given up on the notion of going to an appointment/retention concept used in many other states. It’s when the governor appoints a judge and the judge then stands for what’s called a “retention election.” Voters can keep the judge or toss him or her out.

I’ll stick, therefore, to the notion that Texas eliminates good judges who happen to belong to the “out” party, the one no longer in favor with voters. In Texas — except for some pockets — that means Republicans are “in,” while Democrats are “out.” Dallas County, interestingly, is elected Democratic judges. Big deal. It isn’t any better than it is, say, in the Panhandle. Good GOP judicial candidates are getting bounced out in Dallas County the way good Democratic candidates keep losing.

I’ve asked the question many times of judges and judicial candidates: What is the difference between Republican justice and Democratic justice?

Their answers don’t turn on partisanship. They turn instead on judicial philosophy. They either have a “liberal” view of justice or a “conservative” view. Why, then, can’t voters decide on the merits of a candidate based on his or her judicial philosophy, regardless of party?

All of this would take an amendment to the Texas Constitution. It won’t happen, of course, as long as Republicans control both legislative houses, the governor’s office and the lieutenant governor’s office. Why should it change? The GOP controls everything.

The same thing can be said when Democrats ran the show. They didn’t show any inclination to changing the Constitution, either.

We’re stuck with a lousy judicial election system.