Controversial term ends

Listen to this article

I don’t think you can go out and publicly say, I’m the president of this organization, but right now, I’m not speaking as such.” Thomas J. Basting Sr. President-elect, State Bar of Wisconsin

The 50 people who served as Wisconsin State Bar President prior to 2006 almost assuredly included visionaries, idealists and advocates.

But the man who served as the 51st may have been all three, and the combination created enough controversy for several terms.

Steven A. Levine publicly championed several initiatives throughout the course of his presidency that were peripherally or directly contrary to State Bar policies. He saw his actions as remaining true to the people who elected him.

However, some bar leaders said Levine’s actions blurred the lines between personal and professional objectives.

There is no book on how to be president, said attorney Patricia K. Ballman of the responsibilities that come with leading the State Bar of Wisconsin. Ballman served as president in 2002-03, and though she did not follow Levine’s term closely, she said there are general principles to be followed as president.

“As bar president you need to observe the wishes of the constituency, which are not always obvious,” said Ballman. “Generally speaking, the president should focus on things that excite him or her, but also make sure that an agenda isn’t contrary to the goals of bar members and the public.”

Opposing Positions

On several occasions, Levine civilly butted heads with members on the Board of Governors on proposals including a voluntary bar and the abolition of the diploma privilege for Wisconsin law school graduates.

Committees were established to research cost and logistics involved in a voluntary bar, as well as whether Wisconsin would remain the last state to employ the diploma privilege. Both investigations are expected to conclude later this year, but Rep. Sheryl K. Albers proposed a constitutional amendment supporting a voluntary bar earlier this spring.

Though he did not lend a hand in drafting the proposed legislation, Levine independently appeared at two hearings in support of Assembly Joint Resolution 31, which the board had voted to oppose at its March 9 meeting.

The independent support raised a few eyebrows, including those of President-elect Thomas J. Basting Sr., who questioned Levine’s maverick approach.

“I believe that if you want to run for bar president and get elected, you then become the spokesperson for the organization,” said Basting. “I don’t think you can go out and publicly say, I’m the president of this organization, but right now, I’m not speaking as such.”

Levine, who appeared independently on several occasions to support initiatives contrary to the BOG, defended his actions as simply serving the needs of those who elected him, not necessarily those of the BOG.

“I felt that my most important constituency was the bar electorate who voted for me, not the BOG,” said Levine. “It would have been difficult for me to have been elected, then not represent the views of those who elected me by either remaining quiet or by publicly supporting positions that I and the members who voted for me disagreed with.”

Board Chair Margaret Wrenn Hickey sympathized with the dilemma of the president in that it is difficult to separate personal and professional views, but she also said that it was important to build support within the decision-making body of the bar.

“It’s harder to get things accomplished without that base of support and when Steve came in, he did so as a bit of an outsider,” said Hickey, who referenced Levine’s win as a self-nominated candidate. “He had the votes to get elected, but it wasn’t because of the Board of Governors. It was tough to build that support in such a short amount of time. Are you really going to persuade someone in a meeting? Probably not.”

More than a Mouthpiece

Levine admitted that he was in a “unique” situation as president, in that he felt he needed to represent the bar electorate who voted him into office as well as be mindful of the BOG.

“In part, this dilemma is the result of the very “weak” position that the State Bar presidency is,” said Levine. “The position is designed to be mainly a ceremonial position as the president has just one vote on the BOG, the same power as any member of the BOG.”

Michelle A. Behnke served as bar president in 2004-05 and said realization of the role is a key to a successful term. In her case, Behnke wanted to serve as a “discussion leader.”

“The State Bar, like most governmental units, has checks and balances” said Behnke. “The president often does come in with ideas and stated positions and ‘agenda’ if you will. The board and the president must each exercise their roles in representing the members of the State Bar of Wisconsin, but neither is all-powerful.”

Speaking from experience, Ballman said, a “president can’t do everything” and that judgment plays a key role in picking battles. She also noted that excitement in an issue can be contagious and breed discussion, if not radical change.

Levine’s aggressive approach provided a wealth of debate during his two-year tenure as president-elect and president. Levine said he tried to raise issues some of which had not been discussed among the board, but he has no regrets about rocking the boat a bit.

“I’m not sure this situation has ever occurred, or will ever occur again, but I don’t think it was a bad thing to inject some controversy into the bar,” said Levine. “My raising issues that I specifically wanted the membership to vote on by voting for, or against me, injected some interest in the bar that usually isn’t there.”

Basting, who will succeed Levine on July 1, admitted that he could not remember a more controversial presidency than his predecessor’s. He did not see that as harming the bar publicly. Basting also said he planned to publicly adhere to bar policy during his term.