Stress Test 18: relevant comments from US Congressional staff during Sunday session in Dublin
On Sunday afternoon ICANN hosted a discussion on the IANA Stewardship Transition. (link<https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/sun-transition-perspectives>) In the first section, Ira Magaziner, the Chief Internet Policy Advisor for U.S. President Bill Clinton spoke about the challenges of the global Internet community in finalizing the transition. The second portion of this session had four senior staff members of the U.S. Congress talk about the transition from a Capitol Hill perspective. Below is the scribe feed from Congressional views relevant to our Dublin discussions of Stress Test 18
JEFFREY FARRAH: CHAIRMAN THUNE HAS BEEN INVOLVED AND UP TO DATE ON THIS PROCESS THROUGHOUT, AND GIVING THE TIMING OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE TRANSITION AND THE DISCUSSIONS. HE FELT LIKE THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO AGAIN STATE WHAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUT OF A TRANSITION….. YOU MENTIONED IN 2014 HE AND SENATOR RUBIO WEIGHED IN ON SPECIFIC REFORMS AND IT WAS AT THAT TIME THAT HE SAID THAT HE WANTED TO SEE IT IN THE BYLAWS THAT ONLY GAC ADVICE BY CONSENSUS WOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD. THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE'LL BE ACTIVELY WATCHING THOSE PROCEEDINGS.
DAVID REDL: WE'RE REALLY HOPING TO SEE A RIGOROUS ANALYSIS OF WHATEVER PROPOSAL IS PUT IN FRONT OF NTIA. I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE WHAT JEFF SAID ABOUT THE ROLE OF CONSENSUS IN THE GAC, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SYSTEM, THEN WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY BE TALKING ABOUT A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SYSTEM WHERE ONLY THOSE GROUPS THAT HAVE PRODUCED CONSENSUS ARE ABLE TO BRING SOMETHING UP. THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT FOR US AS WELL.
DAVID GOLDMAN: JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THE POINT ABOUT CONSENSUS, THAT'S COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH THE POSITIONS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS IN THE HOUSE HAVE TAKEN SO FAR.
DAVID REDL: THE THINGS THAT OUR BOSSES HAVE RAISED IN HEARINGS ARE BEING ADDRESSED. YOU KNOW A LOT OF THE STRESS TESTS THAT ARE BEING DONE AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS WERE THINGS THAT WERE RAISED IN HEARINGS AT ENERGY AND COMMERCE AND SENATE COMMERCE.
— Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org<http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org<http://blog.netchoice.org/> +1.703.615.6206
I am more than happy to acknowledge that the GAC does not want to be bound to consensus-based advice. So long, however, as it wishes to have its advice given preferential treatment it is going to have to have special rules. And yes, please don’t make the argument that the Board is legally capable of rejecting the GAC’s advice even after consultation – we deal here in the reality that GAC advice will =always= have a special place before the Board. Hence the absolute need to cabin it? So … I will turn it around and ask the GAC members – are you willing to give up the provisions that require the Board to give the GAC special consideration? Of course not. And that in turn demonstrates precisely why the GAC argument fails. I add only one additional point – the statements below by the congressional staff who were in Dublin mirror precisely what the NTIA representatives have said in the CCWG on any number of occasions (most clearly, that I recall, in Paris in March). By all means, if you want the transition to fail, insist on deleting ST18. But then you will bear the blame. For one thing is certain – without ST18 the transition will fail. Paul Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article...> Link to my PGP Key From: Steve DelBianco [mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 1:21 PM To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: relevant comments from US Congressional staff during Sunday session in Dublin On Sunday afternoon ICANN hosted a discussion on the IANA Stewardship Transition. (link <https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/sun-transition-perspectives> ) In the first section, Ira Magaziner, the Chief Internet Policy Advisor for U.S. President Bill Clinton spoke about the challenges of the global Internet community in finalizing the transition. The second portion of this session had four senior staff members of the U.S. Congress talk about the transition from a Capitol Hill perspective. Below is the scribe feed from Congressional views relevant to our Dublin discussions of Stress Test 18
JEFFREY FARRAH: CHAIRMAN THUNE HAS BEEN INVOLVED AND UP TO DATE ON THIS PROCESS THROUGHOUT, AND GIVING THE TIMING OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE TRANSITION AND THE DISCUSSIONS. HE FELT LIKE THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO AGAIN STATE WHAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUT OF A TRANSITION….. YOU MENTIONED IN 2014 HE AND SENATOR RUBIO WEIGHED IN ON SPECIFIC REFORMS AND IT WAS AT THAT TIME THAT HE SAID THAT HE WANTED TO SEE IT IN THE BYLAWS THAT ONLY GAC ADVICE BY CONSENSUS WOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD. THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE'LL BE ACTIVELY WATCHING THOSE PROCEEDINGS.
DAVID REDL: WE'RE REALLY HOPING TO SEE A RIGOROUS ANALYSIS OF WHATEVER PROPOSAL IS PUT IN FRONT OF NTIA. I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE WHAT JEFF SAID ABOUT THE ROLE OF CONSENSUS IN THE GAC, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SYSTEM, THEN WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY BE TALKING ABOUT A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SYSTEM WHERE ONLY THOSE GROUPS THAT HAVE PRODUCED CONSENSUS ARE ABLE TO BRING SOMETHING UP. THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT FOR US AS WELL.
DAVID GOLDMAN: JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THE POINT ABOUT CONSENSUS, THAT'S COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH THE POSITIONS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS IN THE HOUSE HAVE TAKEN SO FAR.
DAVID REDL: THE THINGS THAT OUR BOSSES HAVE RAISED IN HEARINGS ARE BEING ADDRESSED. YOU KNOW A LOT OF THE STRESS TESTS THAT ARE BEING DONE AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS WERE THINGS THAT WERE RAISED IN HEARINGS AT ENERGY AND COMMERCE AND SENATE COMMERCE.
— Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org <http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org <http://blog.netchoice.org/> +1.703.615.6206
+1 Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey Sent from my iPad On Oct 19, 2015, at 6:57 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote: I am more than happy to acknowledge that the GAC does not want to be bound to consensus-based advice. So long, however, as it wishes to have its advice given preferential treatment it is going to have to have special rules. And yes, please don’t make the argument that the Board is legally capable of rejecting the GAC’s advice even after consultation – we deal here in the reality that GAC advice will =always= have a special place before the Board. Hence the absolute need to cabin it? So … I will turn it around and ask the GAC members – are you willing to give up the provisions that require the Board to give the GAC special consideration? Of course not. And that in turn demonstrates precisely why the GAC argument fails. I add only one additional point – the statements below by the congressional staff who were in Dublin mirror precisely what the NTIA representatives have said in the CCWG on any number of occasions (most clearly, that I recall, in Paris in March). By all means, if you want the transition to fail, insist on deleting ST18. But then you will bear the blame. For one thing is certain – without ST18 the transition will fail. Paul Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key<http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article...> From: Steve DelBianco [mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 1:21 PM To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: relevant comments from US Congressional staff during Sunday session in Dublin On Sunday afternoon ICANN hosted a discussion on the IANA Stewardship Transition. (link<https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/sun-transition-perspectives>) In the first section, Ira Magaziner, the Chief Internet Policy Advisor for U.S. President Bill Clinton spoke about the challenges of the global Internet community in finalizing the transition. The second portion of this session had four senior staff members of the U.S. Congress talk about the transition from a Capitol Hill perspective. Below is the scribe feed from Congressional views relevant to our Dublin discussions of Stress Test 18
JEFFREY FARRAH: CHAIRMAN THUNE HAS BEEN INVOLVED AND UP TO DATE ON THIS PROCESS THROUGHOUT, AND GIVING THE TIMING OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE TRANSITION AND THE DISCUSSIONS. HE FELT LIKE THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO AGAIN STATE WHAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUT OF A TRANSITION….. YOU MENTIONED IN 2014 HE AND SENATOR RUBIO WEIGHED IN ON SPECIFIC REFORMS AND IT WAS AT THAT TIME THAT HE SAID THAT HE WANTED TO SEE IT IN THE BYLAWS THAT ONLY GAC ADVICE BY CONSENSUS WOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD. THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE'LL BE ACTIVELY WATCHING THOSE PROCEEDINGS.
DAVID REDL: WE'RE REALLY HOPING TO SEE A RIGOROUS ANALYSIS OF WHATEVER PROPOSAL IS PUT IN FRONT OF NTIA. I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE WHAT JEFF SAID ABOUT THE ROLE OF CONSENSUS IN THE GAC, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SYSTEM, THEN WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY BE TALKING ABOUT A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SYSTEM WHERE ONLY THOSE GROUPS THAT HAVE PRODUCED CONSENSUS ARE ABLE TO BRING SOMETHING UP. THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT FOR US AS WELL.
DAVID GOLDMAN: JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THE POINT ABOUT CONSENSUS, THAT'S COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH THE POSITIONS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS IN THE HOUSE HAVE TAKEN SO FAR.
DAVID REDL: THE THINGS THAT OUR BOSSES HAVE RAISED IN HEARINGS ARE BEING ADDRESSED. YOU KNOW A LOT OF THE STRESS TESTS THAT ARE BEING DONE AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS WERE THINGS THAT WERE RAISED IN HEARINGS AT ENERGY AND COMMERCE AND SENATE COMMERCE.
— Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org<http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org<http://blog.netchoice.org/> +1.703.615.6206 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> [2015-10-19 13:55:33 -0400]:
I add only one additional point – the statements below by the congressional staff who were in Dublin mirror precisely what the NTIA representatives have said in the CCWG on any number of occasions (most clearly, that I recall, in Paris in March). By all means, if you want the transition to fail, insist on deleting ST18. But then you will bear the blame. For one thing is certain – without ST18 the transition will fail.
If it does fail for this reason, it won't be the fault of the GAC for refusing to accept a ridiculous amendment to the by-laws which has nothing to do with the fears of governmental capture or turning ICANN into a "government-led" body, because as has been pointed out countless times, that just isn't a possibility with non-binding advice regardless of whether the Board is required to respond to it only if it delivers advice by consensus or not. It will be the fault of the CCWG and the NTIA for insisting on an unjust amendment that makes no sense to most of the world — and in private conversations multiple people in ICANN will tell you that. The outside world won't blame GAC. They will blame you. Thanks, Paul, for holding a gun to the GAC's head. But do make sure it doesn't backfire on you and the NTIA. -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283 sip:pranesh@ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh@cis-india.org https://twitter.com/pranesh
LOL .... you give me far too much credit. If you want to blame me for your failings ... by all means ... Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key -----Original Message----- From: Pranesh Prakash [mailto:pranesh@cis-india.org] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 8:28 PM To: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; 'Steve DelBianco' <sdelbianco@netchoice.org>; 'Accountability Cross Community' <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: relevant comments from US Congressional staff during Sunday session in Dublin Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> [2015-10-19 13:55:33 -0400]:
I add only one additional point – the statements below by the congressional staff who were in Dublin mirror precisely what the NTIA representatives have said in the CCWG on any number of occasions (most clearly, that I recall, in Paris in March). By all means, if you want the transition to fail, insist on deleting ST18. But then you will bear the blame. For one thing is certain – without ST18 the transition will fail.
If it does fail for this reason, it won't be the fault of the GAC for refusing to accept a ridiculous amendment to the by-laws which has nothing to do with the fears of governmental capture or turning ICANN into a "government-led" body, because as has been pointed out countless times, that just isn't a possibility with non-binding advice regardless of whether the Board is required to respond to it only if it delivers advice by consensus or not. It will be the fault of the CCWG and the NTIA for insisting on an unjust amendment that makes no sense to most of the world — and in private conversations multiple people in ICANN will tell you that. The outside world won't blame GAC. They will blame you. Thanks, Paul, for holding a gun to the GAC's head. But do make sure it doesn't backfire on you and the NTIA. -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283 sip:pranesh@ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh@cis-india.org https://twitter.com/pranesh
Dear All, That is not the case, We may remove the anxiety of supporters of ST18 in the text relating to community mechanism/ empowerment and separate the issue from the traditional GAC advice by keeping the Bylaws as it is Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 20 Oct 2015, at 01:28, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh@cis-india.org> wrote:
Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> [2015-10-19 13:55:33 -0400]:
I add only one additional point – the statements below by the congressional staff who were in Dublin mirror precisely what the NTIA representatives have said in the CCWG on any number of occasions (most clearly, that I recall, in Paris in March). By all means, if you want the transition to fail, insist on deleting ST18. But then you will bear the blame. For one thing is certain – without ST18 the transition will fail.
If it does fail for this reason, it won't be the fault of the GAC for refusing to accept a ridiculous amendment to the by-laws which has nothing to do with the fears of governmental capture or turning ICANN into a "government-led" body, because as has been pointed out countless times, that just isn't a possibility with non-binding advice regardless of whether the Board is required to respond to it only if it delivers advice by consensus or not.
It will be the fault of the CCWG and the NTIA for insisting on an unjust amendment that makes no sense to most of the world — and in private conversations multiple people in ICANN will tell you that.
The outside world won't blame GAC. They will blame you.
Thanks, Paul, for holding a gun to the GAC's head. But do make sure it doesn't backfire on you and the NTIA.
-- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283 sip:pranesh@ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh@cis-india.org https://twitter.com/pranesh
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
So … I will turn it around and ask the GAC members – are you willing to give up the provisions that require the Board to give the GAC special consideration? Of course not. And that in turn demonstrates precisely why the GAC argument fails.
I add only one additional point – the statements below by the congressional staff who were in Dublin mirror precisely what the NTIA representatives have said in the CCWG on any number of occasions (most clearly, that I recall, in Paris in March). By all means, if you want the transition to fail, insist on deleting ST18. But then you will bear the blame. For one thing is certain – without ST18 the transition will fail.
The GAC representative from the US is also from NTIA. Perhaps they could figure this out inside the GAC and just tell us what the solution is ? I think we are trying to address issues among two parties that in reality are much closer. Rubens
participants (6)
-
Kavouss Arasteh -
Paul Rosenzweig -
Phil Corwin -
Pranesh Prakash -
Rubens Kuhl -
Steve DelBianco