Passage Summary: Electing judges is a mistake because they would have to raise money, and just like with politicians, that money creates messy conflicts of interest.

Conclusion: It is a bad idea to have judges run for election rather than being appointed.

Reasoning: Elections necessitate fundraising from special interests, which creates conflicts of interest in politicians and would likely do the same for judges.

Analysis: The professor relies on an analogy between politicians and judges to suggest that a specific cause (fundraising) will lead to a specific negative effect (conflicts of interest). To justify the conclusion that this makes the election of judges 'bad,' we need a principle that places a high value on avoiding such conflicts in the judiciary. Look for a principle that states any system likely to create conflicts of interest for judges should be avoided, or one that establishes that judges must be held to a standard that precludes such influences.