I have always had a difficulty seeing how my Uncle Sam would let go of something so clearly strategic, especially when most Americans hold it was bought and paid for by American money. So when I opined to some of you that the JPA - or some form thereof - shall forever be with us, some said this was an "over the top" assessment. Follow the link and see the rattles of the the ordinary American political mind. Note well that the politicians named here are not your usual klavern of rightwing firebreathing nativists. These - Snow and Rockefeller - tend to sterling centrist perspectives, if not actively liberal. The *draft* *Cybersecurity Act 2009* [http://cdt.org/security/CYBERSEC4.pdf] establishes some facts on the ground. Read *Sec 2: Findings* carefully. The *recitals* in this part justify what is proposed: the maintenance of the DNS infrastructure currently jobbed out to ICANN is a strategic and critical infrastructure resource which is fundamental to the security and continued well-being of the United States. Plainly put, it is ineligible for "foreign" control. Focus on *Sec 3: Cybersecurity Advisory Panel* and note who are the persons elegible for appointment to help USG/DOC make the decisions on JPA. Be sure to read carefully *Sec 8: Review of NTIA Domain Name Contracts*. The provision for extending USG oversight of ICANN is documented here and the mechanism by which that will be assured. Here is further grist for the mill, compliments of Milton Mueller's blog: http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/4/2/4141451.html http://www.cdt.org/ Kind regards, Carlton Samuels The University of the West Indies.