Norman Ericson

Washington Supreme Court

Position 2

Norman Ericson EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts Degree from the University of Washington Master of Business Administration Degree from the University of Puget Sound Juris Doctor Degree from Gonzaga University
OCCUPATION: Chief Administrative Review Judge
EMPLOYER: Washington State Employment Security Department
LEGAL/JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE: Norman J. Ericson is a judicial member of the Washington State Bar Association who has served over 31 years as a state Administrative Review Judge. Currently, he serves as the Chief Administrative Review Judge for the Washington State Employment Security Department.

Candidate Statement: As a former judicial law clerk for the Supreme Court, I have a deep respect for the Court and believe its Justices should be elected on a strictly non-partisan basis, free of political considerations and special interest campaign contributions and endorsements. In support of that belief, I will not solicit campaign contributions or endorsements. If elected, I can wholeheartedly pledge that my decisions will be truly fair and impartial.

Questionnaire: Not completed by candidate

Official web site: None

Opponents: Michael Johnson, Stephen Johnson, Susan Owens, and Richard Smith.

Candidate ratings (click organization for details):

ORGANIZATION	NORMAN ERICSON	MICHAEL JOHNSON	STEPHEN JOHNSON	SUSAN OWENS	RICHARD SMITH
Joint Asian Judicial Evaluations Committee	*	*	*	Qualified	*
King County Bar Association	*	Not Qualified	Well Qualified	Qualified	Qualified
Municipal League of King County	*	Not Qualified	Adequate	Outstanding	Good
Washington Women Lawyers	*	*	*	Exceptionally Well Qualified	*

Important note! Each of these organizations uses its own standards and rating terms when evaluating candidates; please check their pages for further information. Candidates with an asterisk (*) were not rated, and the reasons they are not included vary. Some were not offered an opportunity to participate; others may have declined. Again, please check the organizations' pages for further details.

Newspaper endorsements (click paper for details):

NEWSPAPER	NORMAN ERICSON	MICHAEL JOHNSON	STEPHEN JOHNSON	SUSAN OWENS	RICHARD SMITH
Centralia Chronicle
Kitsap Sun
Longview Daily News
Seattle P-I
Seattle Times
Spokane Spokesman-Review
Tacoma News-Tribune
Vancouver Columbian

Complete finance report, including:

campaign contributors (click link for contributor details)
direct independent expenditures (over $1,000)

ORGANIZATION	UPDATED	POSITION	FUNDING
Stephen Johnson Campaign Contributors	09/19/2006	Contributors to Stephen Johnson	*$235,253.85*
Building Industry Association of Washington	09/08/2006	Supporting Stephen Johnson	$52,006.15
Constitutional Law PAC	09/15/2006	Supporting Stephen Johnson	$4,583.89
Home Builders Ass'n of Tri-Cities	09/15/2006	Supporting Stephen Johnson	$1,862.28
Committee for Judicial Restraint	09/11/2006	Supporting Stephen Johnson	$4,411.12
It's Time for a Change	09/12/2006	Supporting Stephen Johnson	$64,789.52
It's Time for a Change	09/12/2006	Opposing Susan Owens	$13,391.45
TOTAL Supporting Stephen Johnson or Opposing Susan Owens			$376,298.26
Susan Owens Campaign Contributors	09/19/2006	Contributors to Susan Owens	*$165,451.92*
Citizens to Uphold the Constitution-FAIRPAC	09/07/2006	Supporting Susan Owens	$18,298.48
Citizens to Uphold the Constitution-FAIRPAC	09/07/2006	Opposing Stephen Johnson	$18,298.48
SEIU Washington Political Action Fund	09/15/2006	Supporting Susan Owens	$2,141.59
TOTAL Supporting Susan Owens or Opposing Stephen Johnson			$204,190.47

TOTAL Supporting Norman Ericson			$0.00
TOTAL Supporting Michael Johnson			$0.00
TOTAL Supporting Richard Smith			$0.00

VotingforJudges.org, P.O. Box 1460, Silverdale, WA 98383
Email your comments or fill out our form.

Votingforjudges.org includes ratings and endorsements from numerous organizations. We provide this information so that voters will be better informed about the candidates. We do not rate or endorse any candidates; the ratings and endorsements of organizations included at this site reflect the views of those individual organizations and not necessarily the views of votingforjudges.org or its sponsors.