I’m back from my trip.  While I was gone, I picked up a copy of the Wall Street Journal.  I used to get the WSJ home-delivered about ten years ago or so, but then my paperboy (paperman?) went psycho so I cancelled my subscription and started taking the Journal Star instead.  But that’s another story.

On the opinion page of the weekend edition, Brian Carney interviewed Newt Gingrich (remember him?).  Gingrich, of course, was Speaker of the House for a while, starting in 1994 when the Republicans regained a majority.  The whole interview was good, but I was particularly interested in the former Speaker’s comments on blogging:

“…either the House and Senate Republicans are going to move substantially in the next few months or they’re going to run a very real risk of losing the fall election.”

So what does “Substantial movement” look like? …First, the things they can do, such as cutting down on earmarks and pork-barrel spending. “They should change the House rules so that any conference report that comes back is automatically filed on the Thomas system [the Web site where congressional actions are logged and made pulicly available] and is not voted on for 72 hours so that every blogger in the country can go in and read it. That would immediately cut down on the most outrageous stuff because you wouldn’t be able to pass it.”

I like that idea.  Notice, he doesn’t say so the media can go in and read it.  It’s so bloggers can read it.  He sees bloggers as a potential source for reform in this country if only they were given access to these conference reports.  I think he’s absolutely right.

Let’s all write to Ray LaHood and ask him to request this change to the House rules.  He’s a big supporter of earmarks as long as the process is “transparent,” right?  So he should be a big proponent of this idea.

I’m not holding my breath.  Methinks the lobbyists prefer opacity.