updated and bumped

Just in... Majority Whip Roy Blunt will hold an exclusive conference call with bloggers on Thursday, January 19, at 3 PM Eastern Time to discuss his candidacy to be Majority Leader and detail his vision for the House of Representatives. He will be available to answer a few questions.

I have been invited to participate. I will give you a full report afterwards.

UPDATE, January 19, 3:46 p.m. ET: I just got off the blogger conference call with Roy Blunt, a candidate for Majority Leader in the House. About a dozen bloggers were invited to this call. As I have stated before, I am not making any endorsement in this race, I just plan to do my best to get the most relevant information out there on all the candidates. I do, however want to express my disappointment that I was not invited to participate in Shadegg's blogger conference call, or Boehners. I don't know the process by which bloggers were invited to those calls, but since I've pledged for equal time here, I felt I should make it known that I was not on those other two calls.

On to the call...

Blunt noted that this is the first leadership race that the blogosphere has been part of and "it's going to be interesting to see how we move through the rapid flow of conversation that didn't use to be there." And in regards to this leadership race, he said it's important that we "don't do anything that minimizes our ability to work together." He said both Boehner and Shadegg are good guys, and if either of them were elected as Majority Leader he'd have no problem with it, and he'd support them and do everything he could to make them a successful leader.

He said this race is an opportunity for a new beginning. Unfortunately, it was a new beginning that "no one in our conference wanted to happen." But, we still need to continue to pursue an agenda that is right for America. There needs to be more transparency in the process. He mentioned a few reforms we need to move on... such as the definition of 527s. We also need to look into tribal contributions since they are treated differently.

I got to ask the first question. I noted how Democrats have been relentless in attacking Republicans for corruption, despite the fact their own party has connections to Jack Abramoff and other problems with corruption Yet it seems like the Republican Party has not done much to fight back. So I asked Blunt "Under your leadership, what are Republicans are going to do to counter Democrats ethics/corruption charges?"

He told us that he think "we have to fight." He noted that we have to get our ethics process going in the House, but the Democrats have managed to stall the process for over a year. We can't let the Democrats get away with saying that corruption is a Republican. However, The American people don't believe it's just a Republican scandal. Nevertheless, it may slightly hurt us more, but only because we're in the majority. Still, "this is a problem Republicans are going to do something about..."

Tim Chapman asked Blunt why he felt several other bloggers have endorse either Shadegg or Boehner. Blunt replied, "I don't have a perspective that would be better than yours." But did note that all three candidate have conservative voting records and explained that he always votes for the most conservative budget...

He said he understood the arguments that we need a change, but then asked "but a change from what?" and then listed a number of GOP accomplishments, and our continuing agenda.

Flip Pidot wanted to know what about his plan to move the legislative agenda forward with simultaneously bringing in new ethical reforms. Blunt explained that the legislative agenda is important, but suggested we not lose site of the incredible amount of work the GOP got done last year, such as dealing with lawsuit abuse, the energy bill, and many other things.

He also warned that while we need to accomplish things like these ethical reforms, we shouldn't confuse them with the real legislative agenda.

John Hawkins asked him about giving up his position as Majority Whip. Blunt explained to him that "when you run for any of these jobs you have to think about the future consequences of your actions," and expressed his belief that shoudln't have to give up one job before getting another.

Ed Morrissey wanted to know about moving forward on more than just reworking 527s. Blunt told him that he had tried to defeat the campaign finance reform bill, and while that as a whole needs to be addressed, the 527 problem is something that can be solve immediately in time for the 2006 elections.

Blunt ended the call expressing his desire to do this again, and while they're still adjusting to the new media, he says we'll be critically important to him if/when he becomes Majority Leader.

UPDATE: Audio and transcript here...

UPDATE: N.Z. Bear writes,

Matt:

Wanted to reach out to you on the Boehner and Shadegg conference calls. I can explain why you weren’t invited: because of oversight on my part.

I initiated contact with all three candidates’ offices and requested the calls as an outgrowth of the ‘Appeal’ letter from last week. Because we were considering an outright endorsement of a candidate, rightly or wrongly, I did not think you’d be comfortable participating in that effort, given your work with the GOP.

When the calls began to happen, Shadegg and Boehner’s staffs both asked me to spread the word and send the invites, and I simply re-used my email list from the ‘Appeal’ effort. In retrospect, given the changed nature of the effort, it would have made sense to invite you, but we were moving darned fast and I didn’t: my apologies.

Just wanted to make clear that it should not be held against Shadegg or Boehner’s offices that you weren’t invited; the oversight was mine.

No hard feelings. Whether we support Candidate A, B, or C, we're all fighting for the same goals.

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/majority.cgi/2947

---

Name:

Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

What is the Vice-President's last name?

(NOTE: You must get this correct, otherwise, your comment will be rejected.)

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)