Posted on 09/14/2016 3:51:39 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
Grassley Statement at a Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Protecting Internet Freedom
Sep 14, 2016
Prepared Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts Hearing on “Protecting Internet Freedom: Implications of Ending U.S. Oversight of the Internet” September 14, 2016
The openness, security and stability of the Internet are of principal importance to all who use the Internet around the world – yet it’s the United States’ historical stewardship role over key Internet management functions that has helped to ensure this openness, security and stability. Today the Obama Administration intends to end this role not for technical considerations but for political reasons.
In March 2014, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) – headed by Assistant Secretary Larry Strickling – indicated its intent to transfer key Internet domain name functions, known as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions, to a global multi-stakeholder community. This past August, we received word that the Obama Administration intends to allow the IANA functions contract to expire as of October 1, 2016, allowing this transition to go forward.
This is happening despite the fact that a number of significant questions related to the transition remain unanswered including whether the transition will yield an unconstitutional transfer of United States government property, how the transfer will affect human rights and free speech issues, if U.S.-controlled Top Level Domains such as .gov and .mil could be compromised or if the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will be subject to increased antitrust scrutiny.
Here at the Committee, we’ve continued to engage with the administration about this transition and to date the answers we’ve received have been inadequate. It’s clear that the administration hasn’t conducted a thorough legal analysis of the many issues outstanding.
The Administration argues that stopping this transition could embolden authoritarian regimes, but these countries already fail to respect freedom of expression and will continue to advocate for government-led management of the Internet no matter what happens. If this Internet giveaway goes forward, there’s no reason to believe that authoritarian states would stop trying to exert greater control and we don’t know how things with play out long term. Recognizing this harmful impact of potential capture by foreign governments, the Administration has stated its proposal wouldn’t replace the status quo with a governmental or inter-governmental model. Nonetheless, under the March 2014 proposal, the power of foreign governments would be significantly increased as the threshold for the ICANN board to reject government advice is made more difficult, with 60% of the board now needed to reject government demands.
In ICANN, we see an organization that was blasted as recently as this past July by an Independent Review Panel for its inability to carry out basic duties of self-governance. The Review Panel found that ICANN’s Board Governance Committee has “failed several transparency obligations,” engaged in the “cavalier treatment” of constituent requests, and failed to undertake an examination of whether ICANN staff or contractors complied with their obligations under the Articles and Bylaws of incorporation. These failures raise serious concerns about the ability of ICANN to exercise proper corporate oversight and call into question ICANN’s organizational maturity. All the more disheartening is the fact that the potential for similar abuse from the board will only increase when the U.S. contract ends. Under the proposed new bylaws, the Board Governance Committee will retain its role and continue to rely on ICANN staff to inform its deliberations and will retain its ultimate authority. These types of governance problems make ICANN susceptible to corruption and abuse.
Over the last two years ICANN has undertaken accountability and corporate governance changes because of United States influence. With additional issues in areas such as human rights, corporate jurisdiction, and intellectual property left unresolved, there’s little reason to believe that such reforms will be completed without the continuation of the contract and the United States’ continued oversight and involvement.
These concerns, especially when it comes to accountability and transparency, are reasons why I have always questioned if the transfer is in the best interest of the American people and global Internet users. Despite the administration’s intention to give up the IANA functions contract, these concerns persist, indicating that this course is misguided, and at best, premature. I appreciate Senator Cruz calling this hearing and look forward to the witness testimony.
[research links coming up]
Easy-to-Understand Summary of Internet Giveaway
Few people understand how the internet runs, but we all know what ‘web pages’ are. That’s where we ‘surf’ for information.
And the devil is in the details. Those pages are organized through domain names [including the pages of this forum].
ICANN runs the domain name system. And its contract with the US federal government limits ICANN’s ability to meddle with peoples’ ownership. Europe now recommends changing that. They want to use ICANN as the vehicle for a globalist network to police the internet [aka Hillary’s Internet Gatekeeper]. That way they can suppress ‘hate speech’.
China is also holding secret talks with ICANN.
The federal government need only renew that contract by September 30 or ICANN becomes a ‘free agent’ which can secretly wheel and deal with anyone on earth.
Deadline — ICANN’s contract must be renewed by September 30.
Basics for Understanding Obama’s Internet Giveaway
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3464721/posts
— and listing/linking the senators and news sources sounding the horn.
Fairyland Fixes for O’s Internet Giveaway
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3466481/posts
Senator Cruz Set Up a Countdown Clock:
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/internetcountdownclock
[my system crashes even when I try to load a text-only cache.]
FIREWORKS Predicted at Today’s Hearing reg. Internet Giveaway [aw!m vanity]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3469224/posts
Yes ICANN Can. Downplay O’s Internet Giveaway at Your Peril
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3465347/posts
Open Letter of Concern by Senators Cruz, Lankford, and Lee
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3463938/posts?page=113#113
[ICANN is stalling on specifics and holding secret talks with China.]
Open Letter by 25 advocacy groups incl. ‘Americans for Tax Reform’
http://docs.techfreedom.org/Coalition_Letter_IANA_8.10.16.pdf
More Specifics reg. ICANN’s Contract with US
http://freedomoutpost.com/obama-violates-federal-law-again-reliquishes-us-control-of-internet-to-private-international-body
Washington Examiner Report
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3460431/posts
The Wall Street Journal
http://www.wsj.com/articles/an-internet-giveaway-to-the-u-n-1472421165
Breitbart
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/29/icann-un-take-internet-oct-1
The [UK] Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3763094/The-United-States-control-internet-s-addressing-United-Nations-September-30-pledging-not-to.html
OBAMA READY TO CEDE AMERICA’S CONTROL OF INTERNET...
http://thehill.com/policy/technology/272568-internet-domain-handoff-takes-major-step-forward
Beta News
http://betanews.com/2016/01/24/the-clock-is-ticking-for-the-us-to-relinquish-control-of-icann
Related FR threads
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3407691/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3394704/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3463938/posts
Many have sounded the horn:
Senators Grassley, Cruz, Lankford, and Lee along with Congressman Louis Gohmert and ALL FOUR relevant congressional chairmen.
News Reports:
1. Drudge
2. Washinton Examiner
3. Wall Street Journal
4. Breitbart
5. [UK] Daily Mail
6. The Hill
Senator Cruz is doing good work ... as a senator. Can we support what he’s doing here, or are we obligated to hate the guy regardless the good he does?
Please see my tagline before trashing me for thinking Cruz is doing good work here.
What Paul Rosenzweig thinks:
Rosenzweig is an insider and should command the utmost respect for his knowledge regarding this controversy:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3469224/posts
He and other insiders suggest caution.
“There are many unanswered questions that, in my view, need answering before the transition takes place.” — Paul Rosenzweig
Europe now recommends changing that. They want to use ICANN as the vehicle for a globalist network to police the internet
Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon are All Urging this to happen so they can take the lead in Silencing the People Worldwide.
Yeah, there’s a lot of Cruz bashing when it comes to internet freedom. I agree — irrational ‘groupthink’.
We should ignore Grassley, Gohmert, and the four most relevent chairmen in congress and TRUST OBAMBA’S JUDGMENT on this issue.
It’s like this If Obama is for it you know it is not good for America.
or are we obligated to hate the guy regardless the good he does?
If he stays on point, I support what he is doing.
What, exactly, is broken and needs to be fixed?
Swedish telecom chief to steer web body ICANN to independence [USA Internet control expires Sept 30]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3394704/posts
[my take]
Europe is seeking to form of ‘internet ostracism’ to regulate ALL domain names [aka web addresses] throughout the world, and Obama is on board.
Here’s a puff-piece I dissected:
http://betanews.com/2016/01/24/the-clock-is-ticking-for-the-us-to-relinquish-control-of-icann/
It’s packed with empty assurances, but here’s the ‘meat’ ...
‘For decades, ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) — the non-profit organization that manages IP addresses and domain names — has been overseen by the US Department of Commerce ... Most upset are those who point to the independent nature of the internet, and the need for any body with global power to be similarly indpendent. Later this year ICANN is set — at long last — to completely separate from the US government.
While this does hinge on US government approval, by the end of September, ICANN could instead be in the hands of businesses, individuals, and multiple global governments.
[The tacit concern is over US surveillance by the NSA etc. But how does control of domain names affect that?]
... The new arrangement, announced back in March 2014, would introduce a great degree of diversity of oversight, although ICANN insists that despite the involvement of the US government, it has still been able to operate independently.
... Ultimately, this is little more than a common sense PR move that decentralizes control of the internet.
... a move to a more diverse structure should mean that it is better at self-policing and allows for far greater transparency and accountability ...
Do what you like, but I’ll never trust Cruz as far as I can throw him.
Are you aware Cruz championed a position on a major bill for months, held special events, told folk to vote a certain way, and then he voted the opposite?
I don’t trust this guy any farther than I can drop kick him.
Exactly. Why should we trust Obama with something this important?
If this isn’t worthy of breaking news is there ANY sidebar for this report?
It will basically be like under UN control. I won’t even be able to call muzzies ... muzzies.
There’s some speculation that the UN can use ICANN to collect taxes for it on every website. But that’s minor compared to policing ‘hate speech’.
I'm dense, who renews the contract, Congress I hope?
But since ICANN falls under the jurisdiction of the Dept. of Commerce, I imagine the Executive Branch has final say?
bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.