Don’t fix something that isn’t broken.

That’s our reaction to Amendment 40, a ballot measure voters will decide on during the Nov. 7 general election.

Amendment 40 seeks to place 10-year term limits on Colorado judges. It is retroactive, kicking five of seven current Supreme Court justices and seven of 19 Court of Appeals judges off the bench.

We think that’s ludicrous.

The amendment seeks to limit experience on the bench, where experience is critical. The amendment allows future Colorado governors to choose replacements for all judges whose time is up, allowing for partisanship and bias.

Our current system works.

Currently, nonpartisan commissions review judges after two years and again at 10 years, making recommendations to voters about judges’ performance, work with prosecuting and defense attorneys, and fairness. Voters then decide whether to retain current judges based on their performance. In addition, judges are forced to retire at age 72.

There already are checks in place to maintain satisfactory judges and rid the system of ones not performing up to voters’ standards.

We don’t think a blanket rule setting term limits for our judges is the answer.

Sure, Amendment 40 might be an easy way to make sure we don’t have judges — ones who don’t deserve to be there — on the bench for too long.

But we already have a system that weeds out the unfair judges from those the voters approve. Judges are dealt with individually, and those with experience and know-how continue to serve us. What more could we ask for?

Passing this amendment would mean a permanent change to the state constitution. It would rob voters of their right to choose which judges stay and which ones go, and opens the door to partisan politics slipping into judge appointments. We just can’t see the good in changing the current system that works.

Amendment 40 just begs the question: Why fix something that isn’t broken?

We say don’t. Vote “no” on Amendment 40.