CHARLESTON -- An experiment in public financing of election campaigns in the 2012 race for two seats on the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals is even more needed now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled corporations can spend as much as they want in election of federal office holders, according to one member of the House of Delegates.

"I think this just makes the governor's proposal even more important," said Delegate Barbara Fleischauer, D-Monongalia. An attorney in Morgantown, she said she thinks the idea of a pilot project is the correct approach "so if it needs to be adjusted, we can do that. And if it doesn't work, we can abandon it."

She said the large amounts of money spent on some Supreme Court campaigns in recent years has created the impression with many voters that those seats are "for sale."

Gov. Joe Manchin has recommended a bill to provide for a pilot project that would provide public funding for the candidates running for two 12-year terms on the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals in the 2012 election. His recommended legislation was introduced in both the House of Delegates (HB4130) and the state Senate (SB233) earlier this week.

The key provisions of the bill call for a maximum of $350,000 for any one candidate in a contested general election campaign and more than a dozen sources of revenue in the Public Campaign Financing Fund including $1 million each of the first two years from the state unclaimed property fund in the treasurer's office, a new annual fee on all licensed attorneys in the state ranging from $50 to $75 depending on their years of work and a "fair administration of justice fee" on all lawsuits ranging from $100 in Supreme Court cases down to $10 in magistrate court.

State Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, D-Logan, is less certain of the impact the U.S. Supreme Court ruling will have on the governor's legislation.

"I guess one could say the jury is still out on this case at the moment," Tomblin said Thursday. "Since I have not had enough time to fully study the scope of the court's decision or how deep the ruling may go, it is difficult to estimate any effect it may have on any associated legislation which may come before the Legislature. We are still assessing the decision."

Delegate Don Perdue, D-Wayne, said Thursday that he would "like to see more public financing of campaigns for elective office."

Perdue said he views the issue from his perspective as chairman of the Health and Human Resources Committee in the House of Delegates.

"We are never going to get health care reform in this country until we get meaningful campaign finance reform," he added.

Delegate Jim Morgan, D-Cabell, said he believes the biggest positive for public financing of campaigns is to encourage more people to seek public office so for that reason alone "I would vote for it."

National Video