Any time that an individual has to make a decision, to get input from a number of areas or a number of individuals I think is a healthy thing. I believe this is the fifth modification, in a little over 18 years, of the judicial advisory committees, made by a couple of different governments.
Again, going back to their creation, it wasn't written in stone. It wasn't to be the last word, if I remember the conversations, and I think I do fairly clearly. There have been a number of modifications, and the success of each of those can be judged. But it seems to me that getting a number of people or a number of groups that have an absolute commitment to the best interests of our judicial system is healthy, and I certainly am one who will look forward to the input from them. It's a huge constitutional responsibility to appoint judges to the Superior Court. I have to believe that expanding that group of individuals who are able to provide advice and are willing to provide advice is a step forward.