General Assembly’s website looks nice, but is troublesome

January 6, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

I alluded in my blog Friday to the redesign of the Indiana General Assembly’s website. I have high hopes for the site, as it seems like it will make following the Legislature easier. But right now, it’s got some kinks to work out.

I hoped those kinks would have been worked out before the legislators reconvened for the 2014 short session. During the session, we at Indiana Lawyer visit the General Assembly’s website daily to keep up on legislation and committee hearings. Under the old site, you could search for bills by legislator or subject. You will be able to do that on the new site – eventually. Those options are there, but they are not working, or working to their full potential. Click on “By Legislator” and you get a haphazard listing of legislators. There seems to be no rhyme or reason as to why Rep. Casey Cox is listed first, followed by Sens. Lonnie Randolph, Mark Stoops, Karen Tallian, etc. The dropdown box that allows you to search specific representatives is listed in alphabetical order by last name, so that helps.

Right now, nothing shows up under the “By Subject” listing, a helpful tool for those seeking to find bills of interest to the legal community, such as on court functions, criminal laws or changes to probate law.

Searching for bills is also problematic. Type “trust” in the generic search bar, and you get 792 results, which you can whittle down on the left side to take you to the bills this session that contain the word trust. But trying to use the “Bills” tab of the search bar renders no results for the word trust.

I’m looking forward to what the new website will be, as it will make keeping up with the General Assembly easier. I just hope that the site reaches its full potential before the session is over.

You can check out the redesign site at http://iga.in.gov .
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Someone off their meds? C'mon John, it is called the politics of Empire. Get with the program, will ya? How can we build one world under secularist ideals without breaking a few eggs? Of course, once it is fully built, is the American public who will feel the deadly grip of the velvet glove. One cannot lay down with dogs without getting fleas. The cup of wrath is nearly full, John Smith, nearly full. Oops, there I go, almost sounding as alarmist as Smith. Guess he and I both need to listen to this again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRnQ65J02XA

  2. Charles Rice was one of the greatest of the so-called great generation in America. I was privileged to count him among my mentors. He stood firm for Christ and Christ's Church in the Spirit of Thomas More, always quick to be a good servant of the King, but always God's first. I had Rice come speak to 700 in Fort Wayne as Obama took office. Rice was concerned that this rise of aggressive secularism and militant Islam were dual threats to Christendom,er, please forgive, I meant to say "Western Civilization". RIP Charlie. You are safe at home.

  3. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  4. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  5. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

ADVERTISEMENT