I appreciate the time and effort Professor Barnett
took to analyze the election process of the State Bar Board of Governors. Although I am
not aware of any complaints in the past, it became apparent to me when I took over as
executive director in May that the set election schedule needs to be re-examined in order
to provide for the timely dissemination of information to our members.
However, I am disturbed by Professor Barnett’s implication that
the low turnout of candidates and eligible voters is part of a bar conspiracy. One needs
only to look at our nation’s overall lack of participation in the election process to
determine that the bar’s turnout rate is simply an unfortunate reflection of the
values of our modern society.
I also would like to point out that board candidates are given ample
opportunity to present their platforms and criticisms during interviews with the staff of
the Califor-nia Bar Journal. Several bar “critics” such as Peter Keane
(currently dean of the Golden Gate University School of Law) have campaigned for and won
seats on the Board of Governors, and their criticisms have been fully covered by the Bar
Journal.
With nearly 136,000 active members of the State Bar — a larger
constituency than many cities in California — running an election presents an ongoing
challenge. However, staff members continually strive to find new and innovative methods of
meeting the needs of our members. Among other things, for example, this past year bar
staff has been exploring the option of internet voting as a convenience to members and a
cost-saving measure for the State Bar.
As always, I welcome constructive criticism and solutions to problems
that arise in the course of serving my colleagues in the legal profession.
Judy Johnson
Executive Director, State Bar of California |
