Agreed that was also my reading. -jg On 16/10/2015, 2:32 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Salaets, Ken" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of ksalaets@itic.org> wrote:
I would add that the letter suggests bipartisan support for its contents.
On Oct 16, 2015, at 2:14 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@gmail.com> wrote:
Eberhard
There are several plausible explanations -- not all of which are equally likely and which are to some degree inconsistent. Here is my best speculation:
1) The most plausible is that on the Democratic side, the Chairman had delegated most of this issue to Senator Schatz to follow. He may have more direct knowledge and/or interest and this might be a bandwidth question. Some of that is plausibly supported by the fact that the DOTCOM Act referred to in the letter is co-sponsored by Thune and Schatz and not Thune and Senator Nelson (the full committee ranking member).
2) It is possible that Nelson may disagree with the substance of the letter and/or the DOTCOM Act. Since DOTCOM has passed the Senate committee without his violent objection this might be a slight/modest disagreement -- enough to keep him off the letter but not enough to make him actively engaged in the issue.
3) The Senate is actually on recess might now. It might be as simple as the fact that Nelson was in Florida (his home state) and busy with other matters so he couldn't focus and that they realized that the letter would be better sent sooner than later, so they did not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
4) Finally, on the Republican side it may reflect that the Chairman is actively interested in the issue and has "taken" it to the full committee from his subcommittee chair. For that half of the equation, I am reasonably confident that my speculation is accurate.
Cheers Paul
Paul Rosenzweig Paul.rosenzweig@gmail.com +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Costa Rica: +506 7008 3964 Our travel blog: www.paulandkatyexcellentadventure.blogspot.com My professional blog: www.paulrosenzweigesq.com Link to my PGP Key
-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dr Eberhard W Lisse Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 9:03 AM To: 'Accountability Cross Community' <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Cc: Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] FW: Chairman Thune and Senator Schatz letter to Steve Crocker ahead of ICANN 54
Can someone explain to me, what it means, if anything, if the letter is signed by the Chair of the main Committee and the Ranking Member of a Subcommittee?
I was expecting either the Chair and Ranking Member of the main Committee or Chair and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee.
Or Chair of the Committee and Chair of the Subcommittee.
el
On 2015-10-16 00:25 , Paul Rosenzweig wrote: Colleagues
Good morning in Dublin.
The attached letter from Senators Thune and Schatz to the Chair of the ICANN Board will be of interest to many of you.
I wish you good fortune in the meetings
Regards
Paul [...]
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community