SEA 14 Ballot form. Election Law. Sen. C. Lawson; Rep. Richardson, Thomas.

(I note that the very beginning of the law starts with poor form. It defines “chad” at IC 3-5-2-8.7 and then says that section expires on 12/31/05 — so that part of the Indiana Code will be effective for approximately 8 months. And yet the provision will have to be published in any subsequent edition of the Code until it is repealed. Typically this kind of thing is put in a Noncode section so it won’t clutter up the Code for future generations.)

Establishes a ballot form that lists candidates by office for optical scan and electronic voting systems. Adds circles to the types of figures permitted to indicate a vote cast on a ballot card. Revises the printed instructions for optical scan ballots to permit a voter to darken the circle, oval, or square indicating the candidate voted for.

Specifies that “independent ticket” refers only to tickets for President and Vice President of the United States; or Governor and Lt. Governor. Revises the instructions for preparing an optical scan ballot card or an electronic voting system that includes the offices of President and Vice President of the United States.

Provides that references to punch card ballots expire December 31, 2005 (the use of punch card ballots is prohibited after that date). Removes references to ballot card and electronic voting systems in provisions that only apply to paper ballots, lever voting machines, and the use of punch card ballots for presidential elections.

Requires that certain features of an electronic voting system concerning the verification or correction of a voter’s ballot apply after December 31, 2005. Prior to this legislation, it appears that the law required an electronic voting system to allow private and independent verification by the voter that the system registered the voter’s vote correctly. The system also had to permit a voter to correct such a ballot privately and independently prior to the vote being cast. Finally, the system had to notify the voter of the effect of casting multiple votes for the office and provide an opportunity to correct the ballot. The General Assembly has apparently lifted these requirements between April 22, 2005 and December 31, 2005 so that, for this period of time, electronic voting systems are not required to have these features anymore.

SEA 13 DNA Testing of Felons. Criminal Law. Sen. Zakas, Wyss; Rep. T. Harris, L. Lawson.

This law permits the use of DNA data erroneously obtained or added to the DNA data base. Specifically, “The detention, arrest, or conviction of a person based on a data base match or data base information is not invalidated if a court determines that the DNA sample was obtained or placed in the Indiana DNA data base by mistake.”

The law also requires a person convicted of a felony (or conspiracy or attempt to commit a felony) to submit a DNA sample to the department of correction or a sheriff. It permits the department of correction to perform DNA analysis on a sample at any time, and requires such an analysis when federal funds for testing become available.

SEA 12 Code Adam. State Administration. Sen. Zakas, Breaux; Rep. Walorski, Welch.

This bill establishes the “Code Adam” program to locate missing children. Requires the department of administration to adopt rules to establish and implement a “Code Adam” protocol for lost or missing children in certain state buildings. In particular, DOA must set forth information a state employee is to obtain when a missing child is reported and set forth the person in the DOA the state employee must contact. DOA must also adopt procedures the contact person must then follow, procedures for department employees to search a building in which the child is presumed to be located, and procedures for contacting law enforcement if the child is not found.

I have nothing against this law. But, in general, I hate legislation with emotionally charged names (“Code Adam” “Megan’s Law” “Amber Alert” etc.) If it’s a good idea, do we really need to name legislation after a murdered child to get it through the General Assembly?

But, in case you’re interested, here is the tragic story behind Code Adam.

SEA 8 Arbitration in family law. Family Law. Sen. Ford; Rep. Duncan. (Governor’s signature pending.)

Specifies the procedures in family law arbitration cases. I deliberately remain as ignorant as possible in family law cases, so I can’t really offer much guidance on what this law does.

SEA 2 Family Law: Parenting Time. Sen. Ford; Rep. Duncan.

This bill replaces references to “visitation” with “parenting time”. It was prepared by the child custody and support advisory committee. I actually went back to the Minutes of 8/25/04 where the draft seems to have been discussed originally. I can’t find any explanation as to why this is important enough to require legislation. It seems to be a matter of semantics. No explanation is provided in the committee’s final report.

The bill also provides that a prosecuting attorney or private attorney in a Title IV-D case is not required to litigate a dispute between the parties relating to the amount of parenting time or parenting time credit.