HARRISBURG (Feb. 28, 1997) -- The Pennsylvania Judicial Evaluation Commission today released its second group of ratings for candidates seeking election to Pennsylvania's appellate courts.

Commission Chairman John A. Carpenter said that of the 12 candidates, five are rated Highly Recommended, six are Recommended, and one is Not Recommended. Candidates receiving a Not Recommended had the opportunity to withdraw from the race.

"To receive a Highly Recommended, a candidate must possess the highest level of competence, integrity, temperament, and demonstrate extraordinary ability to perform quality work," said Carpenter.

The independent Commission based its findings on a two-phase process. The preliminary phase, conducted by a three-member panel, consisted of a review of a candidate's questionnaire and writing samples, an interview and inquiries of those who know the candidate. A second interview was then conducted before the Commission. The rating is reached after a thorough review of each of these components.

Carpenter said ratings are reached much like a jury -- by discussion, debate and consensus.

"The objective of the Commission is to conduct an independent evaluation of each candidate. These ratings are just that -- a fair and comprehensive evaluation offered to voters to assist them in making informed decisions in the voting booth," explained Carpenter. "We invite the citizens of Pennsylvania to look over our shoulders, review the candidates' qualifications and make their own judgments as to the validity of these ratings."

Composed of nine lawyers and nine other citizens representing a variety of professions, the Commission's members include a former national president of the League of Women Voters, a former publisher of the Philadelphia Inquirer, a physician, a dairy farmer, a former college president, an artist and others.

Last December, the Pennsylvania Bar Association announced that it was removing itself from rating judicial candidates, but would sponsor an independent citizens' commission to evaluate appellate court candidates.

This decision came after a year-long review which included a public poll regarding judicial ratings, the experience of other states which do judicial candidate ratings and comments from media representatives across the state.

According to Carpenter, the new system is more "voter friendly" by giving people detailed information including candidates' responses to a comprehensive questionnaire and the rationale for each rating.

The Commission will be releasing its third and final group of candidate ratings in late March.