LITTLE ROCK — Arkansas Court of Appeals Judge Josephine “Jo” Hart overcame a fundraising disadvantage to claim an apparent victory Tuesday for a seat on the state Supreme Court.
Preliminary results showed Hart out-balloting Raymond Abramson, who has received seven times the donations Hart has collected. Abramson, also a judge on the Court of Appeals, conceded defeat and commended Hart for her successful campaign.
With 2,366 of 2,370 precincts reporting, the unofficial results for the Position 4 justice race were:
Hart .........................193,040 Abramson ................103,374
In the only statewide contested race Tuesday, Hart, 68, and Abramson, 60, were competing to replace Jim Gunter on the state’s highest court. Gunter, elected a justice in 2004, is retiring from the seven-member court when his term expires at the end of the year.
Both candidates touted their roots as small-town attorneys, telling voters their rural practices had given them wide-ranging experiences that big-city lawyers couldn’t duplicate. Hart retired as an Army colonel and attorney. Abramson was Montgomery County public defender for 30 years and is certified to defend death-penalty cases. Both promised as judges to deliver a fair-minded, evenhanded ap- plication of the law.
Abramson is also an appeals judge whose term expires at the end of the year. Since he was appointed to the judgeship by Gov. Mike Beebe in June 2010, he was barred from seeking election to the post.
With Abramson’s concession, Beebe will have to appoint a replacement for Hart. She was re-elected to her third term on the appeals court in 2010. She was savoring her win Tuesday night after getting up hours before dawn to campaign.
“When you work hard, your family works hard and your friends work hard, and it all comes together like this, it’s a good feeling,” she said.
As an elected appeals judge since 1999, she acknowledged she had advantages over her opponent in name recognition and on the ballot, but she said that she had been “scared to death” by how much money Abramson had raised. She said her victory showed what hard work could do. Key to her success, she said, was focusing on reaching the average person.
“We’ve been putting out signs, handing out [campaign] cards, speaking to any group I can, be it Sunday School class ... or high school groups,” she said, saying her message about an impartial judiciary has been well-received. “I think it’s critical to our nation we have jurists who ... apply the law fairly. You have to dispense justice fairly and impartially.”
But Hart did have one advantage that money can’t buy. As an elected judge, she was entitled to list her title on the ballot. Abramson’s name appeared without his title because appointed judges are not allowed to use their titles on the ballot. Hart had him at a disadvantage when she entered the race, he said.
“Clearly that was a major uphill battle for us. But we ran a strong well-organized campaign and I have no regrets,” Abramson said.
Abramson, in his firstever race, raised vastly more money than Hart, according to the latest campaign disclosure reports, collecting $315,032 to her $44,763.
He collected $81,867 in April alone, the filings show, with Hart raising $33,963.
In total, Abramson reported he has bolstered his campaign with $46,944 in loans while spending $356,929, according to the reports filed May 15. His big expenditures for April, for which he reported $225,198 in spending, included $20,000 on radio advertising and $120,000 in TV ads.
Hart’s filings showed she has mostly self-financed her campaign with $115,155 in loans. She has spent $159,270 so far, the reports show.
Front Section, Pages 1 on 05/23/2012