Bar should not limit ability to seek presidency

Listen to this article

The State Bar of Wisconsin currently rotates its president-elect among three areas: Milwaukee; Madison; and out-state. Each year, it selects two candidates from one of the three regions, and the membership votes.

However, any member of the bar can run against them, if he gets enough nominations.

The bar wants to change that, so that, if it’s Madison’s turn in the rotation, a Milwaukee attorney could not run against them.

The impetus for the change is that Steve Levine, a Madison attorney, ran as an alternative candidate in an out-state year, and won.

The Bar maintains the change is necessary, so that all attorneys, wherever they practice, have the opportunity for leadership within the Bar.

Had Levine been a former president of the local bar in Madison, exploiting local connections in a populous locale against, I would be sympathetic to the Bar’s concerns.

However, he ran an issue-oriented campaign, one of the first in recent history. Most campaigns pit two Bar insiders, both protectionist of the status quo, offering the membership little to vote on, except the candidates’ resumes and personalities.

Levine, in contrast, ran on a platform of ending the mandatory bar and making it voluntary – a position with widespread support among the rank-and-file, despite (understandably) non-existent support among the leadership.

Thus, the timing of the Bar’s proposal suggests the real purpose of the proposal may not be to encourage geographic diversity in the Bar’s leadership, but to preserve orthodoxy in the opinions and platforms of the Bar’s officers.

Suppose a hot-button issue arises on which the membership and leadership are sharply divided. Any member of the bar, regardless of address, should be able to mount a protest candidacy and tap into the disaffection of the membership with the Bar and its hand-selected candidates.

No member of the Bar should have to wait for his region’s rotation to come around, by which time the issue may be moot.

To view the State Bar’s Supreme Court petition click here.