Another ugly and expensive election contest for Wisconsin Supreme Court began Monday.

Get ready for nasty and misleading attack ads on television, radio and in your mailbox by early spring. And prepare for the court's reputation to sink even lower.

It doesn't have to be this way.

Wisconsin should change its system of selecting high court justices so merit trumps politics -- so justices can be independent and impartial rather than soiled by the suspicion and partisanship that election campaigns create.

Wisconsin should adopt merit selection reform, just as half the states and much of the world have.

Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Randy Koschnick announced Monday he will challenge Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson for her high court seat in the April 7 election.

Other challengers may still emerge.

But it appears the race will be a repeat of the two previous ones in which millions were spent fighting partisan-tinged campaigns for what's supposed to be a nonpartisan office.

To his credit, Koschnick pledged Monday to repudiate false accusations made by third-party groups. Trouble is, it hasn't been the outside groups running the worst ads. It has been the judicial candidates themselves.

And the last two winners have had to serve under ethical clouds and the perception they owe something to the powerful special interests who helped them win.

Judicial election campaigns are turning Wisconsin's top judges into politicians by almost forcing them to sling mud for the popular vote. Judicial elections are turning the state's top court into a second partisan legislature.

High-cost, hard-hitting elections also have jeopardized the judicial branch's vital responsibility to protect individuals and groups who are unpopular with the majority.

Wisconsin should instead demand that its high court be filled with open-minded justices who have strong experience, reputations for fairness and records of rarely being overturned. And merit selection reform would move the state as close as possible to that goal.

Merit selection isn't perfect. But it minimizes politics by creating a neutral panel -- similar to Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board -- to create a short list of the top justices the governor can choose from.

Elections will always determine whom our lawmakers and governor will be. We want the legislative and executive branches to be partial to the public's wishes and whims. That's democracy.

But the state's high court has a different role. Our top justices should be impartial and insulated from voter demands so they can apply the law fairly and protect our individual freedoms and rights.