Check out the Obama transition site change.gov and read this piece on it in today's Post by Dan Froomkin "You Mean We Can Talk Back." This represents the shift I've been discussing from e-mail to web-based grassroots and every member of Congress and interest group should follow suit.

Last week, Alan Rosenblatt of the Center for American Progress (a fellow Tufts alum, I might add), hosted another terrific round table on the impact of technology on this election and what the future might hold. His panel included Andrew Rasiej and Micah Sifray who I quoted in my last blog post and Jose Antonio Vargas of the Washingon Post who covered the election from a tech perspective. Much has been written about how Obama used technology so successfully in his campaign to organize his constituents and raise money, but two questions came up that bear much discussion going forward:

There is terrific article in today's Politico on the impact of the Internet on the 2008 election written by Andrew Rasiej and Micah Sifry of Personal Democracy Forum entitled The Web: 2008's Winning Ticket. This is a must read for online political operatives.

Just to keep the drumbeat going on my last post that we should move from the e-mail Congress grassroots strategy to a web-based system, I do think Congress has a role to play. I argue they shouldn't be forced to ramp up their server capacity to accommodate the deluge of form e-mails but, in return, they should agree to pay attention to web-based grassroots appeals.

During the four days last week between the two House votes on the Financial Rescue package the flood of interest group generated, form letter, constituent e-mails caused the House IT department to limit them in order to prevent a server crash. (Read The Hill for the full story). This highlights, yet again, the need to augment the email Congress strategy with web-based grassroots to avoid this in the future.