JEFFERSON CITY — A Missouri House committee held a contentious hearing Wednesday on two joint resolutions that would change the way judges in the state are appointed.

House Joint Resolution 153 and HJR 119, introduced by Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, and Rep. Cathy Jo Loy, R-Carthage, would require judges to be appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate.

“(This) House joint resolution is not about weakening the courts,” Loy said. “It’s about examining whether the current system of selecting our judges best serves Missourians and maintains public confidence in the judiciary.”

Currently, under what is known as the Missouri Plan, Missouri Supreme Court judges, Court of Appeals judges and judges in the city of St. Louis and the counties of St. Louis, Clay, Jackson, Platte and Greene are appointed by the governor. They face retention votes at periodic intervals.

When a judicial vacancy occurs, a selected nonpartisan judicial commission interviews and selects three qualified nominees for the governor to appoint one within 60 days. If the governor doesn’t appoint one within the 60-day window, then the committee appoints the nominees themselves.

“Although the Missouri court plan’s official title includes the word ‘nonpartisan,’ it is anything but,” Chappell said. “It is entirely partisan.”

Chappell said he is introducing this resolution because he believes the courts have been making poor decisions recently.

“Maybe some of the decisions that have been handed down lately would not have been so politically motivated if the courts were populated differently,” he said.

The resolutions faced questions from Democrats and Republicans on concerns that the proposed system would increase partisanship in the judicial branch.

“This is a supermajority Republican state, you all control every branch of government,” Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee’s Summit, said. “The governor and the commission that he puts together in order to pick a judge panel is comprised of Republicans and because the rulings from the courts aren’t conservative enough for you, you want to throw out the entire plan.”

Loy noted that the judge panel is not all Republican.

Rep. Rudy Veit, R-Wardsville, asked the sponsors what would happen if they disagreed with the rulings made by judges appointed by their proposed system.

“I want to be clear, even though the representative suggested that I’m wanting to do this because of my partisanship, I never said that,” Chappell said. “I believe the system itself is not reflective of the people.”

Chappell added that the proposed resolution would be more reflective of the people, and not inherently partisan, because the governor and Senate in charge of appointments were elected by the people.

“One of the roles of government of the judiciary branch is actually to protect a minority from the majority, isn’t it?” Veit asked.

The resolution received testimony from people both in support, and against the bill.

“I think we have poor decision making, poor quality of judges and something needs to change,” said Samuel Lee, director of Campaign Life Missouri.

Eric Jennings, government relations counsel for the Supreme Court of Missouri, testified in opposition to the resolution because he believes the Missouri Plan is a structured process and professional evaluation that provides accountability to voters.

“(The resolution) would bring a very different process in place here in Missouri, and would reintroduce many of the elements that the Missouri Plan originally sought to filter out,” Jennings said.

Jennings faced criticism from Rep. Mark Matthiesen, R-O’Fallon.

“So the Supreme Court sent their attorney here to say ‘yeah we like it as it is,‘” Matthiesen said.

Jennings clarified that he was testifying on behalf of the Judicial Conference of Missouri, but Matthiesen interjected, “No, no, no, don’t interrupt me. We’re done.”

HJR 153 would also change all judicial terms to seven years.

Currently, state Supreme Court judges and Court of Appeals judges serve 12 year terms, circuit judges have six year terms, and associate circuit judges serve four years.

The resolutions will require a majority vote in both the House and Senate before being placed on a general election ballot to be voted on.