Question of the day (Updated by Rich)
Thursday, Jun 5, 2025 - Posted by Isabel Miller
* The Legislative Information System’s General Assembly website has been a workhorse for years - simple, functional and familiar. Last year, we told you about a new “beta” version of the website. Now, the full switchover is set for next month…
Click here to check out the beta site.
* The Question: What do you think about the change? Have you tried the beta site yet? If so, how has it worked for you?
…Added by Rich Miller… A legislator sent me this test of the new site’s “virtual assistant” and the same thing happened to me when I attempted to replicate it…
From the same legislator…
It takes 5 clicks to open a bill page on the new site and only 3 clicks on the old site. Does this new site improve anything? What is going on here?
* I have been warning subscribers about this silly AI feature since last December…
The new beta looks a little better, but the LIS folks apparently couldn’t help themselves and added a cheap “artificial intelligence” element to the site.
The LIS “Virtual Assistant” is designed to answer questions that registered users submit. A buddy of mine and I were playing with the function last night and a rethink is definitely in order.
For example, my buddy typed, “Can you please tell me what the dumbest bill introduced in the 103rd General Assembly is?”
The “Virtual Assistant” answered not with a bill number, but with a committee name: “Appropriations-General Services - House Committee.” Rep. Fred Crespo, who chairs that committee, might not be too happy with that [although now, in retrospect, Speaker Welch might agree, since he removed Crespo from the committee].
I asked the virtual assistant “Which bills will hurt economic growth?” Its answer didn’t include any bill numbers, but it instead responded with a committee name (House Economic Opportunity & Equity Committee) and the names of two state Representatives (Jawaharial Williams and Ann Williams).
When I asked it who the worst House member was, the virtual assistant returned a partial list of ten House committees, in alphabetical order.
“Please make me laugh,” my buddy asked the virtual assistant. It responded with the names of Reps. Martin McLaughlin and Justin Slaughter – both of whom have “laugh” in their names.
This goofy AI chatbot could easily cause a lot of problems.
But could it be useful to the average person? I asked the chatbot a more practical question last night: “What abortion bills have been introduced?” The response: “Well now I am embarrassed, I do not know the answer.”
I asked, “Which bills would raise taxes?” and it returned the same “I dunno” answer. I asked the AI monster which bills would lower taxes, and it pointed me to retiring Rep. Mary Flowers (D-Chicago). Heh.
I mean, c’mon. Literally nobody asked for this.
I just asked the silly chatbot the same questions and it returned basically all of the same answers, except for the Mary Flowers answer because she’s no longer a member.
In other words, I warned about this problem six months ago and they made no effort at all to change it.
Dumbest upgrade ever.
- Incandenza - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:23 am:
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Ilga original works just fine. There were some minor updates that were needed, but the simple no frills layout made it very simple to learn and navigate.
- Leatherneck - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:29 am:
@Incandenza,
You’re speaking to the choir. I agree with you. Keep the old site as is. Plus the soon to be old site was easy to use on cell phones.
- Chito - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:33 am:
I used the beta during session and prefered it to the original for its appearance more than anything else. I found it easier to locate things and it was just easier on the eyes. I’m looking forward to its continued use.
- NorthSideNoMore - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:40 am:
Agree w Incan and Leather 100%
Not a priority for me, lots of other places to spend $$$. ” If it’s not broke don’t break it”
- It's Just a Pill - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:44 am:
It appears to be more cosmetic than anything. The site is one of the few things associated with Springfield that works on time, every time. So if they want to upgrade the look, ok I guess, but don’t mess up a good thing.
- hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:47 am:
Just checked out the beta.
Hate that I am immediately bombarded with a cookies pop-up.
Hate that there is a reference to the site using Google analytics. Why does Google need to know what legislation or laws I am looking up?
I hope this new site doesn’t make it harder to look up things but my default assumption based on my experiences in today’s tech world is that any change made is going to be for the worse.
- Steve Rogers - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 10:57 am:
As long as it has the same functionality, then I’m fine with the updated look. Admittedly, the old site looks like something from the 1990s
- Michelle Flaherty - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:06 am:
ILGA is terrible and must be changed.
Who changed ILGA? Change is bad.
- Been There - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:07 am:
I had no problem with the current ILGA site. I tried the Beta a couple of times during session and didnt like it. But after looking at it today (with more time on my hands) it does have some appeal. Its basically just a prettied up version of what we have now. But the member’s section is nice especially with the display of the members. But I agree with Leatherneck. The new site isn’t great on a cell phone. Not enough info on one page. You have to scroll through many more pages than just looking at a simple list. No big deal on a laptop but I definitely use my phone more when they are in session.
- Norseman - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:07 am:
Just took a quick stroll. It seems functional and without needing to get into the types of reports I used when “in the biz” I have no criticism. As far as if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it, it’s a nice adage but shouldn’t be an organization’s only goal. The point is to provide efficient and effective service. Especially, if you’re using taxpayer money. Without hearing from LIS, I assume the site is intended to provide more efficient access and/or a better way of quickly populating and updating the data (a proverbial problem with government websites).
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:22 am:
===ILGA is terrible and must be changed.===
I don’t think anyone has ever said that. This is a change nobody asked for.
- TheInvisibleMan - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:31 am:
Hopefully it’s a result of still being in beta, but the ‘bills’ page on both the house and senate are only showing the first 100 bills. To see anything more, you have to use a dropdown.
The old site layout for displaying this was far superior. It allowed an easy way to see when new bills were added within the grouping, as the other already viewed groupings will show up as ‘visited’ in the text color change. New grouping will immediately show on page load as not visited simply by the link color displayed. On the new site, that’s not how it is formatted and it takes far more user input to get the same level of information which was previously available visually with no additional user input. There’s now no way to know if a grouping option is new or not without selecting the dropdown and looking within it.
For examples, Lets say I looked at all the bills in all the groupings. In the old site, each of those grouping links changes color to signify I’ve already looked at that grouping. When a new grouping shows up, I can see I haven’t looked at it yet simply by the link color being the color used for unvisited links. I’ll immediately know without any additional navigation that there is new information I haven’t yet seen there. On the new site, nothing visually changes in the dropdown to signify I haven’t yet looked at the grouping if it is new.
Granted, using the current site has decades worth of muscle memory in navigating it, so it may just be me. But I’m not sure if there is any way to adjust to the new site with that indirect visual information now being removed.
- Lamb - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:33 am:
whatever just join the rest of the nation and archive the floor and committee proceedings already
- Candy Dogood - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:33 am:
The current website is quick and nimble. No frills. Gets the job done. Relatively easy to use.
Why does this website need graphics?
Whatever is supposed to happen when I go to the find my legislator link isn’t happening.
Are the high resolution photos of members that have been heavily retouched really in the public interest?
- ChicagoBars - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:42 am:
The Chicago City Clerk spent a couple million on a new legislative site a few years ago and it is bad and worse to use on a smartphone. The only hope I can offer is that after a few years you give up pointing out that the “upgrade” was a downgrade because the IT people who knew the old system have all retired.
But if anybody on ILGA IT is reading this, pretty please test it on a couple different phone browsers before making the switch. Please (banned punctuation)
- Been There - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:55 am:
====as the other already viewed groupings will show up as ‘visited’ in the text color change. ====
This is good point. I used it a lot looking at what amendments were filed with the synopsis. They should have a sort feature that allows you to look at them either as bill number order or last filed.
- Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:56 am:
In my experience, once the computer geeks “update” something or “make it user friendly”, watch out.
They enjoy spending hours staring at a monitor, so the more bells and whistles, the better.
- SAP - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 11:57 am:
Prefer the old version, although preferring the old version is my default setting. Probably get used to it after some use.
==Hopefully it’s a result of still being in beta, but the ‘bills’ page on both the house and senate are only showing the first 100 bills. To see anything more, you have to use a dropdown.==
You can type a bill number in the search bar at the top right hand corner and it takes you straight to your bill.
- Central Illinois Centrist - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:06 pm:
Tried beta few times this session but really not a fan at all
- Skeptic - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:16 pm:
“Literally nobody asked for this.” Nope, the consultants (who made bank on this) said, “You know what would be really cool?” “Yeah, let’s do it[banned punctuation]”
- Excitable Boy - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:17 pm:
- Dumbest upgrade ever. -
Easy Rich, some of us are old enough to remember CapFax 2.0.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:20 pm:
===old enough to remember CapFax 2.0===
I’d put that awful site up against this ridiculous LIS site any day.
- Excitable Boy - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:35 pm:
- I’d put that awful site up against this ridiculous LIS site any day. -
Lol. I actually recall not hating 2.0.
- Leslie K - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:36 pm:
Awful, ugly, and difficult to navigate. For years the existing IL site has been one of the best state legislative sites I’ve used. It is simple, effective, and works cleanly on a variety of platforms (my newish iPhone, my company Samsung phone, reasonably up-to-date laptop, ancient deskstop, etc.). How does making the site more opaque and less available/navigable to people with older tech improve transparency? Oh, it doesn’t.
- Ares - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:37 pm:
The existing ILGA site is fine as is.
- Just a Citizen - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:42 pm:
Just wondering how much did this new upgrade cost?
- jolietj - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 12:49 pm:
More clicks to get to things. Not good.
- Leatherneck - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 1:32 pm:
While the LIS’s new GA site is atrocious, at least it’s not as bad as trying to look up a press release or any other announcement or web link from Illinois.gov since at least December 2021. Their search engine’s functionality is confusing, to say the least:
https://www.illinois.gov/search-results.html?q=&contentType=news
Bring back the old IIS site used up until about 2016. Very functional and easy to use.
- Numbers... - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 1:41 pm:
I was on another state’s website and one nice feature they had was when you are looking at existing statutes, they have a list of bills that were pending that would amend the statute you were looking at. There are improvements that can be made, but overall, this seems like a downgrade.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 1:41 pm:
More clicks to do the most basic, repetitive, and important thing people do with the website = not an upgrade. Period.
- yinn - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 1:54 pm:
What a coincidence. On Twitter I’ve been following a statistics person, @kareem_carr, who’s explaining AI “hallucinations” today. He says AI is built on a language model for flexibility — being approximate vs. being exact. This works all right with summaries and translations (where you are needing to avoid copyright infringement, etc. etc.) but not so great if you need an exact answer. Thread recommended.
- Anyone Remember - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 3:03 pm:
“… they have a list of bills that were pending that would amend the statute you were looking at.”
The old green screen LIS had that functionality as a specific search function, something the current web version doesn’t.
- Joe Schmoe - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 3:17 pm:
Change is not good. Old doesn’t make it bad - it works fine, especially when on the run and on the phone.
- Been There - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 3:46 pm:
==== It responded with the names of Reps. Martin McLaughlin and Justin Slaughter – both of whom have “laugh” in their names.====
I wonder how either of them would feel if we started calling their names sounding like laugh. Rep Marty Mc “LAUGH” lin. Rep Justin
S “LAUGH” ter.
- Curious George - Thursday, Jun 5, 25 @ 7:18 pm:
I multistate lobby in over 12 states. ILGA is one of the better legislative websites. All function and no thrills, exactly how it should be.
If I could incorporate 1 key update to the current ILGA website, include amendment synopsis on the bill status page but clearly state that it has not been adopted yet. At present the amendment synopsis is buried under legislative reports until if/when it’s adopted.