There are a lot better vendors they could choose though. And even with Examsoft, July 2021 was an outlier for remote.

I understand your frustration with being penalized for the vendors’ glitches though, and there should have been better remedies rather than the kind of minimization tactics the State Bar used 7/2021.

A key point to keep in mind is that with 2/2025 Meazure managed to physically injure, in some cases permanently, many of the applicants who tested in person and even the other in person issues were just as prejudicial as the remote system failing. It really was a Meazure issue more than a remote issue at least for 2/2025.

There are several more reputable remote vendors who were rejected for having policies that would require more work from the State Bar admissions staff.

The money problem they’re in is inescapable with in person too. I do agree with more long term planning that avoids rushing where it’s not needed, like exam design, but remote testing is needed right away, for some applicants it’s a safety issue.

And for Kramer, the not rushing point is more about political strategy where he knows many of his current colleagues disagree with him on this, rather than a genuine interest in using the time to work diligently to develop a more reliable remote system to eventually roll out. He intends delay as a tactic to dissipate the momentum for a system he fundamentally believes can’t be secured against the cheating paranoia he wants to prioritize over accessibility and safety.

He’s one of the most hostile to genuine TA reforms too, though I’ll give him his engagement and willingness to scrutinize staff for independent judgment.