Some good suggestions on CLE changes that would help attorneys keep costs down
Thanks to twitter, I came across an attorney, Donna Seyle, who happens to both practice in my state (CA), teach various social networking related seminars, and blog about topics near and dear to my heart! She also has guest bloggers and this most recent post of interest is by one I have met via Twitter: Tim Baran, of uMCLE.
In a recent post, "Helping Lawyers Meet the Cost of MCLE Requirements," Tim discusses how changes to CLE governing rules could help keep down CLE costs for attorneys.
The top two suggestions are:
- All CLE Boards should allow for reciprocity, letting attorneys get CLE credit in multiple states for the same course. All attorneys with multiple state licensing could benefit from this practice.
- Remove limits on the number of credit hours that can be earned via on-demand programming such as streaming video or DVDs.
One item Tim didn't mention, but would also help, would be for CLE boards/regulators to focus on the quality of CLE provider seminars and reduce exorbitant fees that are charged providers and then passed on to attorneys. The fees charged by CLE boards throughout the country vary widely, from $300 in California to up to $6,000 in Illinois. When a state bar governing board is charging a CLE provider thousands of dollars, they are doing so to make money off the provider, they are not doing so because their cost of policing that provider is some how more expensive than any other state's costs.
at is true. Though this has actually been going on for a bit more than recent months. I think I met the handsome 
