I enjoyed the following read from Marcia Oddi at the Indiana Law Blog on how her stories and objections (as well as from others) may have had an impact on keeping certain materials available on the Indiana Legislative web site, eg., Previous acts of the Legislature!.
What comes to mind at first is "I am blawger, hear me roar!" Yes, I know I have used that Helen Reddy aliteration before, but what do you want creativity, originality, or just consistency? [wink].
Seriously, change comes from many directions, and not all proponents nor proposals get heard, accepted or even implemented.
Although I cannot comment on the Kentucky legislature's response from my own experience, I can comment on the AOC and Kentucky's Court of Justice web site's response to suggestions.
Very, very good! First, they can be reached. Second, they respond. Third, they are a government organization, so understand they move in steps (albeit small steps). Change requires a conscious effort to consider the consequences when you have a bar membership this large, and the ripple effect of poor implementation would and could be incredibly disruptive.
The director and the staff at the AOC have always been quick and responsive to telephone calls, email inquiries, and questions.
Look at recent developments - increased digital records of proceedings, more courthouses, more modern courthouses, live web casting of Supreme Court arguments, recordings of Court of Appeals arguments, CourtNet access to public court records via the KBA for lawyers.
Yes, they can do more. But a call, an email, a question works.
I have been afraid that a blog posting on a point brings too much attention forcing more deliberation on some points so I try to be selective on my ideas.
Meanwhile, back to the inspiration for this post. Thanks Marcia.