Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. Bill text, history, and voting results are all in different places and do not connect to each other. Roll call votes are nearly impossible to find unless you happen to know the date they happened.

    <

    p>Thank you for writing here, and I for one certainly appreciate the steps that have been taken. The intra-governmental bureaucratic issues are understandably frustrating.

    <

    p>This is one of the most important issues facing Massachusetts in terms of transparency and accountability. How can we hold our elected officials accountable if we can’t reasonably find out how they voted on a certain bill?

    <

    p>My wish list is as follows:
    – One web site for each bill, including text (or a link to text), bill status and history, and links to all relevant roll call votes and committee actions.
    – Legislator pages that include (or link to) their voting records for the legislative session, bills they have filed, and bills they have co-sponsored.

    <

    p>I understand and appreciate that the legislature’s data infrastructure is old and not easily translatable to this sort of online system, but as I said this should be a top priority.

    <

    p>Thank you again for reaching out!

    • This can be found on the left margin on the top of half of the front page.  Click on “Legislature” and from there you have three choices: General Court, which links to the general bill information you refer to, House of Representatives, which links to members contact information and links to their individual pages, and Senate, which does likewise.  The one thing I’ve looked for and can find very little information about is the Governor’s Council.

      • But go there and try finding info on the global warming solutions act. I don’t know the bill number offhand, which makes it difficult. I also don’t know what date it was voted on in the House and Senate, which makes finding a roll call (if there is one) more difficult.

        <

        p>Sure, the bill history page will tell you which roll call it was, but there’s no link directly to it. Why not? That seems like it should be a relatively simple thing to do. (Especially as Jim Caralis has already done it at OpenMass.org.)

        • We can certainly pass along your observations; the people who work on the legislature’s web content are always receptive. We noticed that eury13 used an informal title for the bill. Perhaps they could tag bills with the informal names that users might search for them by or create an index of ‘informal’ bill names. I’m sure that quite often citizens know the subject of a bill, but not the official name or number. (By the way, here’s a post on the same topic, but with the federal government as the source of misery. It sure sounded familiar to us!)

          <

          p>Unfortunately, much of what they do is a manual process, and it’s in addition to their regular job for most of them. It would seem the problem is not in identifying areas for improvement, but in elevating the importance of work done for the web site. We’re wondering if any of you have approached your senators or representatives about this, and if so, what kind of response you received.

          <

          p>Oh, and the Governor’s Council has never published anything on the web. We maintain a page on the main portal with names, addresses, and (some) email addresses, but that’s the only information we’ve been given. Sometimes you can’t find something because it’s just not there.  

          • It sounds like the biggest change that needs to happen is that the legislature’s internal data management system needs updating to allow for better web integration. Knowing how much legislators love to foster increased transparency and public oversight of their activities, I’m guessing this ain’t at the top of their priority list. I will contact my elected officials about the matter, though.

            <

            p>And may I add that I certainly appreciate the two of you taking the time to seek us out for feedback and engage in this dialogue. Keep up the good work!

    • It’s congress’s bill tracker: http://thomas.loc.gov/

      <

      p>If Massachusetts could have something modeled on it, (or maybe even get the software from the Feds, though there might be a lot of integration work,) that would be extremely awesome.  

  2. I’d like to see the state maintain a public policy blog with user policed content, where we could interact directly with the leadership.  All elected officials and their staffs should have accounts on the blog.  Anyone can register and post content, and the blog community decides which posts are the best ones that should get the attention of the decision makers.  At that point, a conversation ensues about how best to proceed, with input from everyone on the blog.  Proposals that pass muster then get public hearings, and sensible public policy that everyone can agree with is enacted into law at the end of the process.  

    <

    p>Obviously, we would need a lot of rules – people who flame others without contributing, conspiracy theorists and other crap could not be tolerated, but a well functioning web community could self police this adequately.  Think about it – true people-powered public policy.  If the state funds the development of this in the open source community, everybody wins.  What are the chances that you’ll make this dream come true for me?

    <

    p>Also, what’s the status on the adoption of the Open Document Standard?  I haven’t been paying attention to that, I’ve been busy campaigning…;)

    • Hmmm, some of these features sound like what you already have on BMG. I’ve seen elected officials and their staffs post here (and debate policy with you, I think(?)). I’d like to put this back to BMG’ers and ask you what value would a state supported blog add? I’m not saying it wouldn’t, I’m just trying to tease out a bit more what value YOU (and your fellow citizens) would get if WE run it.

      <

      p>And more importantly, if we build it, will they come? I’m sure you will come, but will your elected reps and fellow citizens use it? We’ve heard of reps and senators that refuse to use email. So, this is more about people and process than the technology. If you want this type of exchange with your reps, they need to know that you want it. Do they? Do you know of other states or government who doing anything like this, or have related features we could emulate?

      <

      p>Alternatively, what if we were to focus less on the interactive, deliberative piece (and leave that to the private blogosphere) and focus more on simply giving you improved access to the underlying information such as eury13 requested in the first comment?  

      • …but if you look at this thread, you can see that the left-leaning folks are getting tired of the cranky reight-leaning folks, many of whom fail to contribute anything substantive to the debate.  My feeling is that, if we had a state-sponsored public policy blog, the rules could be stricter – if a poster fails to offer substantive dialog, s/he would lose your chance to participate.  The owners of this site don’t often ban people, and I don’t blame them for that, it’s tough enough attracting people to any web site and banning folks will reduce your audience.

        <

        p>But if it was a state-sponsored blog with stakes like I’ve outlined, I think you’ll find more people who are willing to talk – maybe it will end up being a bunch of moderates, but maybe that’s what it will take to formulate sensible public policy.  For example, I can’t understand why we can’t respect the 2nd amendment and still keep guns out of the hands of lunatics willing to shoot up our high school and college classrooms – I think that’s the type of issue that could perhaps be settled if enough people figured out a sensible approach.

        <

        p>I would hope that we could persuade all elected officials to use such a blog – the ones who refuse to participate might find themselves on the outside after the next election, if their constituents don’t like the lack of interaction.  I don’t know if it’s been tried elsewhere, I’ll ask around on DKos and let you know.

        <

        p>I liked eury13’s suggestion, but I’d really like to take it further – this is more like “open source legislation”.

        <

        p>Thanks for answering – and an update on the Open Doc format would be great as well, please let us know where that effort is, ok?  

        • That’s just it John! How could we possibly have “stricter” rules, and ban people who don’t contribute anything “substantive” and still be considered objective and non partisan? How do you define “substantive”? After all, we have a higher standard to live up to than the 4th estate (which is allowed to have a point of view). I’m still intrigued by this idea but stumped as to how to make it work without appearing playing favorites. Do you know of any good examples where this is already being done?

          <

          p>I do think you’re right that eventually, politicians who who refuse to participate in this type of open dialog will pay a price. But I think it is the constituents, not Mass.Gov, who need to make that case.

          <

          p>I’ll try to get you an update on the open doc format thing (that’s not my bailiwick).  

          • And to John’s point, the reason we don’t ban more people is not because we don’t want to lose readers, but because we generally like the comments here. I personally, for example, do not agree that “many” of the right-wing commenters (whoever exactly they may be) “fail to contribute anything substantive to the debate.”

              • “if a poster fails to offer substantive dialog, s/he would lose your chance to participate. ”

                <

                p>

                There are people here who just hurl invective and insults

                <

                p>from  JohnT001 @ Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 21:48:05 PM EDT

                “you’ve got nothing but a pack of lies to support your positions.  The GOP – party of ignorance, and proud of it.”

                <

                p>Hope that helps.

          • There are people here who just hurl invective and insults – on a state sponsored public policy blog, that would not be tolerated.  The same with 9/11 truthers and other conspiracy nuts – that type of thing could not be tolerated.  Others would be identified as time goes on – but the opportunity to participate is quite a carrot to dangle, with the stick being you lose your opportunity.  I’m not suggesting that people be banned for partisan reasons, quite the opposite – anyone giving good feedback on proposals is welcome, but anyone disrupting the process is gone.

            <

            p>The purpose of the blog would be to bring people together to work out sensible public policy that a majority of the citizenry could get behind – people who are not willing to work towards that end would not be welcome.  I’m probably being way too optimistic that something like this could work – but I sure would like to try it.  Thanks for your responses, Susan!

          • (As my son would say, my bad!  My mental note to answer about the OpenDocument format went unread.)

            <

            p>Microsoft’s Open XML format was added to the Enterprise Technical Reference Model (ETRM) version 4.1, when it became obvious that it would be accepted as a standard by an open standards body.  The ETRM now includes both formats.    The public comment period for the draft ETRM v.5 ends in less than half an hour, but there are no changes in it relating to this.  (So now I really feel bad about forgetting.  If you have comments,  you should send them in anyway!)

            <

            p>The other issue was about accessibility.  From ETRM 4.1:

            <

            p>

            [1]As of the date of publication of the ETRM v. 4.1, there are no office applications that natively support ODF that also provide sufficient accessibility for persons that use assistive technology devices.  While work is ongoing in this area, at this time, the only implementation option available to agencies is the use ODF through the use of translator software.

            [2] Agencies will have the ability to use either ODF or Open XML with their current version of Microsoft Office by installing the SUN converter along with the Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack.

            <

            p>The decision to add Open XML was not popular with everybody, but it does help further the objective is to be sure government documents are not locked into proprietary formats with unsettling license terms.

            <

            p>Sarah Bourne
            Mass.Gov Chief Technology Strategist

  3. One immediate improvement, despite the checks and balances and independent brances of government, could be either a unified table of contents, or a unified alphabetical index, so that all content, now on line, can be located from a single table of contents and/or index.

    <

    p>Often, what I am looking for does “exist” but is so time consuming to locate that at times, I cannot get what I need [and then will put in a major chunk of time tracking what I need down on an evening or weekend].

    <

    p>The trial courts, by the way, are to be commended for the improvement in their self help area, and online forms access – however for the general public to find that area is potentially a problem.

    <

    p>If there was a link to single, alphabetized “table of contents/index” on the “Front Page” of mass.gov, that included a link to a “self help” link, which then had a list of live links to click on, by branch of government, executive department, content area then use of the self-help forms, whether for the RMV or the trial courts would go up – which would be an efficiency that likely would both provide better public service AND some cost savings.

    • The Mass.Gov home page is a ‘portal’ or ‘window’ into roughly 350,000 pages of state government content. Making all that content quickly and easily available to everyone in the Commonwealth directly from the home page is a huge challenge. Seniors, young adults, business owners, power users, government officials, mothers, health care providers, researchers, job seekers, the disenfranchised, library users, low literacy users, citizens with disabilities… the needs of all those people and more need to be met – and on one page!

      <

      p>So, how do we do this?

      <

      p>    * We organize content to the best of our ability according to user needs, not government structure. Tabs at the top of each Mass.Gov page allow users to self-identify as residents, businesses, visitors, or government. Each page as you drill into the site is designed to meet the differing information needs of these audiences.
         * There are links in the header to state agencies, state online services, and the A-Z subject index on every Mass.Gov portal page.
         * There is a search box in the same place on every Mass.Gov portal page. We currently use the Google Search Appliance, which has 344,000 documents in the index across all of state government. We use the ‘quick links’ feature as an adjunct to get users to the right page more quickly, when the search results themselves don’t provide the most direct route.
         * The home page has links (on the left) to federal, state, and local government resources, as well as a drop list linking directly to pages about every city and town.
         * Online services are listed front and center on the home page, as our belief is that people rarely come to the state websites for a casual visit – they come to get things done, and we want the most used services to be on the home page front and center. Drilling down into the site you will see the online services module appear on each page, with the content becoming more specific to the content area you have navigated to – within the cars and transportation area, links are mores specific to transportation issues.
         * The home page contains features story content that changes at least weekly and is relevant to the month or time of year.
         * We offer RSS feeds so users can subscribe to news and updates and keep current about changes in state government.

      <

      p>Managing the home page of any large, complex organization will always be a challenge. Some users browse the navigation, while others search. Some go directly to a site map or index. Currently we rely on a combination of all of those techniques – and sometimes, it’s still not enough.

      <

      p>A topic index was a high priority recommendation from the 2006 Softplex usability study, which said:

      <

      p>

      Add a topic list to Mass.Gov that would include the most frequently accessed topics through the website. The list would be presented alphabetically and each link would lead to the most relevant information currently available.

      <

      p>Before launching our own index, we researched best practices in web indexing, and reviewed all 50 state websites to see if they were using indexes (only eight were). We developed a list of terms using search terms from both our internal Google Search Appliance and external search engines (using  web metrics). We also used the top 25 search terms from queries done on agency websites. We launched the index last November – there is a link to the ‘A-Z Subject Index‘ on every Mass.Gov portal page in the header on the right side.

      <

      p>I am concerned that you missed the link – we have been meaning to link to this resource more prominently. Do you have any feedback on the index itself? Now that you know it exists, would it have been helpful in your research? Where would you have expected to find a link to this resource?

    • Thanks for your feedback on the Comm-PASS content and for recognizing the Commonwealth’s efforts to maximize procurement record transparency for public procurement in Massachusetts.  While links to Comm-PASS appear on the Mass.gov site, the Comm-PASS website is separate from the Mass.gov site and is hosted externally.  

      <

      p>The Comm-PASS site is in its first iteration, so if you have specific suggestions for site improvements, please send them to comm-pass@state.ma.us.  We will give each consideration within our requirements to follow applicable laws and policies and within our resources.

      <

      p>We acknowledge that when first entering the record management system, it can be overwhelming!  However, users report that once they understand how to best leverage the existing functionality, their subsequent visits return more meaningful results.  We staff the Comm-PASS HelpDesk specifically to assist users in navigating the Comm-PASS website to find the information they need.  We encourage you to seek one-on-one assistance by calling the Comm-PASS Helpdesk at 888-MA-STATE (888-627-8283) or by emailing a request comm-pass@state.ma.us.  Hours of operation are: Monday through Friday between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM.  

      <

      p>We also offer additional support resources and suggest that you read the Quick Tips offered in the right-hand panel of most site pages.  In addition, you can access various guides and FAQ’s by selecting the Related Links tab on the main navigation bar and then following the Comm-PASS Resource Center links.

      <

      p>Again, thank you for your feedback about the Comm-PASS site.

  5. All agencies that promulgate regulations should have their regulations posted prominently, in a standard format.

    <

    p>All agencies that issue advisory rulings, policies, or formal opinions should post them, with a topic index.  Old rulings that are still in force should be scanned and posted.

    <

    p>All administrative law judge opinions and similar matter should be posted, with a topic index.

    <

    p>There should be a single portal for electronic public records requests for all agencies and authorities, with payment of copying fees by credit card, and a tracking system to monitor how long record requests have been outstanding.

    <

    p>

  6. 1) OK, the URLs need to be made SEO and intelligible to humans.  They are absolutely not OK.  This is something you might be able to fix with htaccess files (if you’re using Apache); that’s how most open source CMSs handle it.

    <

    p>2) Speaking of accessibility best practices: all links that aren’t in menus need to have underlines under them all the time.  None of this on-mouse-over nonsense.  

    <

    p>2a) Also, for pure aesthetics: pick ONE font face, maybe TWO.  Your home page is a graphical mess.  It looks like it was made by amateurs.

    <

    p>3) The index isn’t doing it.  Really.  I should be able to search on “Regulations” and the first hit should be top page of The Code of Massachusetts Regulations.  Really.  Not some individual department’s reprinting of just that subsection of CMR which pertains just to them.

    <

    p>3a) This is, of course, presuming there is a CMR homepage which leads to the entirety of the CMR.  If there is, I can’t find it (there used to be!)  I’d sure like one.

    <

    p>4) You ask: “Tell us what you’d like to see, what are your relative priorities — blogs; a searchable, sortable statewide calendar; improved content; mashable data; other …?”  Ye gods: NO MORE FEATURES, not until you get the present mess cleaned up and made presentable.  

    <

    p>Seriously, do you not get how hard your site is to find governmental information?  If you don’t, I’d like to make a meta-suggestion: You need to get up to speed on modern best practices in human experience design for websites.  You need to be doing — if you aren’t already — user stories and paper testing.  

    <

    p>One way to do this would be to send some of your people to the SD Best Practices conference (at the Hynes, late Oct).  Have them learn about things like drafting user stories and doing usability testing and formal requirements docs and all the stuff that makes sure you are in touch with your users’ perspective on the site.

    • ==== RE 1) URLs: ====
      We agree, the URLs are too long, and they give us many problems. This is the downside of using portal technology for presentation. We have already used Apache’s features to shorten them (really!) and have the ability to create two types of shorter, friendlier URLs, but that’s not enough. We’ve designed a solution to make URLs short and persistent, and hope to have it implemented by the end of 2008, unless other competing priorities continue to get in the way.

      <

      p>==== RE 2) accessibility and underlining links:  ====
      During the redesign (see RE aesthetics below), our team and our designer researched current design and usability literature and debated this, and ended up concluding that underline removal for some elements contributed more to usability (less cluttered look, better visual hierarchy of elements) than they detracted (users not recognizing clickable links). Examples of sources included usability guru Jakob Nielsen and accessibility guru Joe Clark. On pages using Mass.Gov templates, links within text are always underlined.  The links without underlines are within what we consider navigation menus. I’m sure you can locate experts who contradict this advice, but as I said, there isn’t consensus, so I think reasonable people can disagree. Subsequent usability and accessibility testing has not shown the missing underlines to be an issue.

      <

      p>===== RE 2a) aesthetics: =====
      Mass.Gov is currently in its third design iteration since launching in late 2001. The first iteration was by a company called New Tilt (merged with Bridgeline Software in 2006). The 2d and 3d iterations were designed by Vineet Thapar whose resume speaks for itself. The latest iteration was based in part on customer feedback about the prior design being too cluttered and busy (we agreed), and on a full blown, professional usability study (excerpts here), which pointed us in several useful directions (for example, it led to us making our top navigation tabs more visible). We are using two fonts — Georgia and Arial; granted, some headings are all caps, others are bold, etc. but I don’t think Mass.Gov differs much in font variations from other respected commercial sites (e.g., http://www.nytimes.com, http://www.boston.com).

      <

      p>By the way, all design/presentation is handled by Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), and the content is structured HTML.  When we implemented the new design, we had only to load a single CSS file and make some minor edits to the portal code that generates the banner area.  You can make all the fonts and colors and non-underlines go away by disabling style sheets.

      <

      p>==== *RE 3) indexing and 3a):====

      <

      p>A search on Mass.Gov for ‘regulations‘ gives two ‘quick links’ to the Code of Mass. Regs. by Topic and the Code of Mass. Regs. by Citation, both of which are provided by the Trial Court Law Libraries.  (They also provide an FAQ page that gives some valuable background on the CMR’s.)

      <

      p>We realized that we should also have a link to the Secretary of State’s page on the CMR’s in order to be clearer about where the regulations can be obtained. We will be adding that soon.

      <

      p>We are concerned that you didn’t see these when you searched, so we’ll also be going back to design and usability testing for Quick Links.

      <

      p>==== RE 4) “NO MORE FEATURES, not until you get the present mess cleaned up and made presentable: ====
      So out of this list, I guess you’d like to see better content, better organized! I’m sorry that you think of Mass.Gov as a “mess.” Although we have a long way to go, we have, in fact, come a long way since 2001 in cleaning up the mess (see our NASCIO award submission for more details) and it is the area we devote the most resources to.  Nevertheless, it is important to stay current with some features (RSS for example) because people have come to expect them and others (blogs, searchable sortable calendar, mashable data, tagging, etc.) because they can create opportunities for people to re-use our data in more useful ways, as Jim Caralis has done with legislative information.

      <

      p>With respect to following modern usability best practices, as I said above in RE aesthetics, our latest design was based in part upon a thorough, professional, third party usability study.  We have also sent members of our team to several conferences on usability and information architecture. In addition, as we migrate sites to Mass.Gov and consolidate them, we insist that agencies conduct usability tests on their new information architecture; this lets them test their particular content groupings and labeling and provides ongoing feedback for us.  We also preach usability testing best practices; understanding user needs and develpment of user personas; and information architecture.

      <

      p>So why aren’t our efforts working to your (and our) satisfaction? Some of it is because our office has to rely mostly on cajoling and enticing. Mass.Gov’s responsibility for content stops at the the top level pages; the agencies are responsible for their content (whether they’re using Mass.Gov templates or not). We preach best practices, but it’s a long, slow, slog to get all agencies to embrace them.

      <

      p>Another challenge is the sheer volume of both content and topics that users are interested in.  Our use profile is all “long tail”.  As an example, the top two searches in June were for “employment” and “jobs”; they accounted for 0.24% and 0.23% of all 814,790 searches. Common quality techniques such as path analysis provide little value with such diversity.  

      <

      p>And I think it’s the old Rome wasn’t built in a day argument. In the 90s, long before I began working at ITD, Massachusetts was way ahead of the curve; we “let a thousand flowers bloom.” This meant we accumulated lots of great content over time, but it was very unstructured, which is difficult and time-consuming to retrofit into today’s best practices (consistent navigation/structure by topic not government structure; label in plain English not governmentese; tagging and other SEO techniques; and so on).

      <

      p>We have lots of ideas about how to address this over time: do more usability studies, use civic engagement to draw attention to these issues, engage more senior decision-makers, fill holes in our published guidance, expand learning opportunities for content owners, etc. We know th
      at we’ve accomplished a lot, but also know that we are far from finished. Do you have more ideas?  We’d love to hear them.

  7. I think so often we create amazing features and have wonderful tools on government web sites… but no one knows about them.

    <

    p>If there’s anything I’d like to contribute to this discussion, it’s this: something needs to be done to alert users to what’s available, how to use it… and to create measures which will keep them coming back. If more people are using mass.gov, there will be more reason to invest more resources in it, making it even better. If that happens, and we can provide citizens both transparency and important tools for their lives, then pretty much everyone wins.

    <

    p>So, yeah… PR. I suppose, actually, that this thread is a very good start. Maybe each time you do something significant to mass.gov – add a new feature, etc. – you could start by publicizing it on BMG and elsewhere. I’m sure others can come up with even better ideas.  

    • Traditionally, press releases have been the primary communication channel, which tends to be a tightly controlled process.  And then the press has to think it’s “newsworthy” – i.e., that it tells a story that will engage paying readers more than other stories.  I suspect that many press releases that mentioned new online features and services looked like just another website (yawn.)

      <

      p>The current administration’s focus on civic engagement encourages folks in government to think of other ways of disseminating information, to be sure the “P” in “PR” stands for “public”.  So, yes, this is why we have suddenly appeared here at BMG.  It also what gave the nudge to move RSS feeds to the top of our development to-do pile.  

      <

      p>We hope to spread the practice out, so that employees will participate on blogs in their area of expertise: folks from public health contributing to health blogs, state biologists contributing to hunting and fishing discussions, etc.  However, it’s a profound (over-worked word alert) paradigm shift for a risk-averse culture, so we shouldn’t expect lightening-quick results.

      • Seriously.

        <

        p>I’m not suggesting you pay them anything, but google has a knack for coming up with cool features that really are useful.  A few googlegeeks working on state gov’t websites might produce some really great tools.

        • A while back, the Governor’s Office received an invitation from Google to work together.  They forwarded it to us, and we responded right away, in an email with lots of ideas of how we thought they might help.

          <

          p>We didn’t hear back.  We sent follow-ups (2? 4?) but they never replied.

          <

          p>We then read in the press that they had selected four other states to work with.  Although still a little miffed that they hadn’t replied, we like to think we weren’t selected because we weren’t pathetic enough…

          <

          p>Sarah Bourne
          Mass.Gov Chief Technology Strategist

          • Google will release some goodies soon enough, and they’ll be useful and usable by you folks in MassGov.

            <

            p>P.S. Open standards open standards open standards.  Taken to the extreme, if I can’t use 100% of the offerings running Ubuntu on a PIII, there ought to be a dang good reason why.  .doc ought to be .rtf or .pdf.  .xls ought to be .csv.  The document formats should never force the people or the government itself to be beholden on private companies to access our own information, writes the fellow using Firefox on his Mac before he goes to the office and uses Opera on his linux boxen.

            • … but the move to fully open will take a while.  People like to use what they’re used to using, which is enough in itself to make this a tough change to implement.

              <

              p>My personal favorite vision is to forget about the desktop and concentrate on doc. systems with web interfaces, that store content in XML and then deliver it in whatever format the user wants, let people work collaboratively on the same materials, and take care of backups, public record law requirements, etc., too.

    • These folk are working hard, and listening.  But sometimes with 60 year olds like me, it takes a tutorial, some kind of guided practice.

      • I guess you can now. It used to not be the case, but they’ve changed it with their latest redesign.

        <

        p>As Gilda Radner used to say… nevermind.

  9. I love the linking and the agency list. Search engine is pretty good. I agree on the legislative stuff.

    <

    p>Thanks for asking!

Archives