Archives

Here’s an update from a post I wrote Aug. 31 about N.C. Supreme Court Justice Paul Newby’s re-election campaign.

Justice Newby

At the time, Newby’s campaign filled out the required profession and employer information for 15 percent of his campaign contributors, a distinction that set him apart from his opponent N.C. Court of Appeals Judge Sam Ervin and six others running for appellate seats in the non-partisan, statewide races.

The information has since been updated, and nearly all the information for 700-plus campaign donations Newby got in 2011 is now available through the N.C. Board of Elections.

 

 

A N.C. Supreme Court justice seeking re-election hasn’t yet provided the occupations and employers for most of his donors, disclosures required for most contributions under North Carolina campaign finance

Justice Newby

rules.

A review of campaign finance reports for statewide judicial races shows that N.C. Supreme Court Justice Paul Newby neglected to include the information for most of the 742 contributions he took in at the end of 2011.

Campaign finance rules in North Carolina require the disclosure of donors’ professions and employers for contributions of more than $50 as a way to let voters see if a particular industry or special interest supports one candidate over another.

Newby’s missing occupational information sets him apart from his opponent Sam Ervin IV, an appeals court judge, as well at six candidates vying for three bench seats on the N.C. Court of Appeals, the lower of the two appellate courts.

All the other judicial candidates provided that information for more than 90 percent of their donors.

In Newby’s case, the occupational and employer information was included for less than 15 percent of the 742 contributions listed in a March 7 judicialdisclosure form with the N.C State  Board of Elections.

Newby also included information for less than 15 percent of the 335 contributions he took in that were over $50.

(Click here to see Newby’s contributors).

 

Read More