Legislative Blogging
Last week, I spoke to a group of legislators from around the nation on blogging. I was privileged to join Texas Rep. Aaron Pena (sorry, Aaron, you'll have to teach me how to do the tilde in Blogger) and Minnesota Rep. Ray Cox's blog coach Griff Wigley. Hmm. A blog coach: "What d'you mean you need to sleep 4 hours tonight, Urquhart? You worthless sack of slugs. The people didn't elect you to sleep. Get back at that keyboard and let me hear those keys click like the Kentucky Derby!"
Prediction: All elected officials will have blogs in 10 years. People are starting to get a little uppity about the fact that federal and state Constitutions mention something about them holding the power and controlling the shots. It seems they're starting to think they should get reports and updates like other bosses do. Imagine. I bet it will be comical that there was an era when the 3 of us gave a should you/shouldn't you speech on blogging.
I talked about the great democratizing roll of blogs, mentioning that it was like the things they're currently doing (town meetings and constituent mailers), only better and more effective. While I don't see blogs ever replacing those worthwhile activities, they do allow elected officials to effectively (1) communicate with constituents (I cited my budgeting entries of late-January), (2) advance an agenda or bill (I cited my local control/education funding bill), (3) gather input (I cited my health care entries and, especially, the comments to this one), and (4) communicate with the Media (I shared stories of members of the Media calling me to discuss my entries).
They laughed. They cried. It was better than Cats.
UPDATE (10 seconds later): Wouldn't you think the Blogger spell checker would recognize "Blogger," "Blogging," blog," and "blogs?" I'm just saying.
Prediction: All elected officials will have blogs in 10 years. People are starting to get a little uppity about the fact that federal and state Constitutions mention something about them holding the power and controlling the shots. It seems they're starting to think they should get reports and updates like other bosses do. Imagine. I bet it will be comical that there was an era when the 3 of us gave a should you/shouldn't you speech on blogging.
I talked about the great democratizing roll of blogs, mentioning that it was like the things they're currently doing (town meetings and constituent mailers), only better and more effective. While I don't see blogs ever replacing those worthwhile activities, they do allow elected officials to effectively (1) communicate with constituents (I cited my budgeting entries of late-January), (2) advance an agenda or bill (I cited my local control/education funding bill), (3) gather input (I cited my health care entries and, especially, the comments to this one), and (4) communicate with the Media (I shared stories of members of the Media calling me to discuss my entries).
They laughed. They cried. It was better than Cats.
UPDATE (10 seconds later): Wouldn't you think the Blogger spell checker would recognize "Blogger," "Blogging," blog," and "blogs?" I'm just saying.
posted by steve u. at 6/13/2005
Subscribe
6 Comments:
Hooray for blogging politicians. Hey, is there any truth to the rumor that you might consider a run against Sen. Hatch? I'd love it.
Thanks for blogging. Keep up the good work.
I'd like to hear your opinion of Bob Schulz and his We The People foundation.
http://www.givemeliberty.org
Steve,
I hope you are right, but I do not see blogging being done by all politicians. For one you mentioned someone having a blog coach. Most constituents do not care what the blogging coach has to say. Perhaps I do not understand the coaches role? Secondly, there are many places in the country where a majority of the people have still yet to use the internet, it is sad but true. Thirdly, there will always be people elected that do not want their costituents to know their every thought. Some just do not have the time of day, again sad but true. You do a great job, but there are very few Steve Urquharts in the world.
Reach Upward, my quote in the paper was not that I'm running, but that I have been approached many times. I also added that I thought many people were being approached by people looking for change. When asked why I thought that was, I said that, more than philosophy even, it was a question of focus and hard work. Senator Bennett ends up being the go-to-guy on everything. Since that quote, though, I've had no few than 100 people contact me and tell me they want me to run; again, I'm not sure it's so much me as it is a desire for change.
Doug, you've left me 3 messages, and I haven't responded. Sorry. I've been going non-stop (Denver and California -- mostly driving -- aargh) for weeks and haven't done the basic research I wanted to do before responding to you. I wanted to provide a link to one of the seminal Supreme Court cases on the legality of the income tax. Once the Supreme Court rules -- like it or not -- that's the law. We have an obligation to follow it, until we are able to change it. Maybe I can grab that link in a day or two and toss up an entry on this topic for everyone to bat around.
Salem, thank you. I think Griff uses the title "blog coach" somewhat tongue-in-cheek. As I understand it, he might best be regarded as a political consultant or volunteer who helps Rep. Cox come up with topics and ideas to blog on; he might even help with research -- which I would love, as shown by my nonresponse to date to Doug's comment above.
I'm with you on the spell check thing. That drives me crazy every time.
Doug,
An instructive case in our federal circuit on the legality of taxes is United States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540, 542 (10th Cir. 1986) ("The IRS' efforts to obtain compliance with the tax laws are entirely proper.").
<< Home