News-Record.com

Janet Pueschel is the mystery candidate for a seat on the N.C. Court of Appeals.

She's not campaigning.

She doesn't respond to surveys.

She didn't offer a personal statement on the N.C. Voters Guide.

She doesn't speak with the media -- some of the media, anyway.

And her motives have been questioned.

Yet she's an experienced Raleigh lawyer and former Wake County clerk of court -- certainly adequate credentials for a judicial race.

What I'd heard about Pueschel was that she entered the contest on the last day of the filing period, Feb. 29, not with the intent of winning the election but to help the incumbent, John M. Tyson.

This is a nonpartisan race, but partisanship usually isn't far below the surface in judicial contests. So, for the record: Tyson and Pueschel are Republicans.

Also entering the race were two Democrats: State Utilities Commissioner Sam J. Ervin IV (grandson of the famous Senator Sam), and 10-year Wake County District Court Judge Kristen Ruth.

Rumor had it that Pueschel jumped into the field to dilute the vote that might go to Ruth and improve the chances that Tyson would get through Tuesday's primary. The top two will advance to the general election.

Women voters who don't know much about judicial candidates tend to favor women. Just by being a Janet on the ballot, Pueschel could grab a share of those votes that otherwise might go to a Kristen.

That idea was reinforced when I read a comment posted by Jeffrey Sykes on Guarino's blog. Jeff attended the 13th Congressional District Republican Convention last weekend and heard Pueschel speak. His account:

"She said she put herself on the ballot because stats show that people who do not know about the candidates will statistically vote for the female name over the male name. She said she hopes to draw enough votes away from the other female candidate to give Tyson a fighting chance. She opened and closed her speech by saying 'I do not want your vote. I want you to vote for Judge Tyson.' "

I was amazed. If that's true, it's very unethical in my opinion. Someone running for public office, especially a judicial office, shouldn't do so in hopes of fooling voters or helping another candidate. So, this afternoon, I called Pueschel at her Raleigh law office to ask if that's what she's doing.

I found she does speak to the media. Maybe not always, but she seemed happy enough to explain her position.

She disputed Jeff's interpretation of her remarks. She didn't say she didn't want people to vote for her, she told me, she said she doesn't want people to vote for Kristen Ruth. She's familiar with Ruth's work as a judge, and she doesn't believe Ruth ought to be on the appeals court bench. She doesn't know enough about Ervin to have an opinion, she said. She does believe Tyson is a good judge.

Pueschel insisted that she's not running to lose in next week's primary.

"I hope I will be on the ballot in November," she said. "I think I would be a good judge."

She's not campaigning, however, because she doesn't believe judges should run political campaigns. They shouldn't make political statements. She said she's appalled when judicial candidates are questioned about their opinion on Roe v. Wade and other hot-button cases. That's inappropriate, she said. Voters should decide about candidates on the basis of their legal education and experience, she said.

Voters who want to know more can reach her by phone, email or mail, she said. "I'm not hiding from anybody."

She'd rather not have judges chosen by election at all, she said, but appointment should include some objective system of vetting to make sure judges are really qualified. And she doubts appointments would be made without partisanship.

So, we have the system we have. While I understand more about Pueschel now, she probably won't make much of an impact in the primary. Even in judicial races, it's hard to win if you don't run.