Posted on 09/23/2016 9:33:07 PM PDT by originalbuckeye
Will Congress stop Obama? Will we still have a free and open Internet in January, 2017?
I do believe will stay the same for now.
The rest of the world is waiting for the upcoming Presidential elections and with I have seen, there is a growing interest in Mr. Trump.
The only thing I can think of is the delay thus far in confirming the liberal successor to Justice Scalia, and that’s mostly one man: Senator Grassley
What’d you expect from the Waffle House ?
I have read that one side disaster of giving away control is that the new controlling body will have control over the .mil domain. The one where our Military communicates with it’s members about non-classified information. Can anyone comment on this?
Yes. Congress will not stop Obama. Aside from a few conservatives none of them care. The HOR are busy running for re-election which is why Obama has decided to do it this fall so none of them are going to give up their recess to fight him regardless.
No. I have no way to influence the congress. I called and wrote to whom I could but it will do no good as my rep is a democrat and the senators don’t care. There is nothing more I can do and have no plan to get it back. Once it’s gone it’s gone.
The question was proposed I gave a simple one word answer. Yes, congress will allow the internet giveaway.
You have to forgive my confusion lately please.
I thought yes meant you thought congress would repeal it or freeze the govt.
I should have known better that you knew better.
Again, my apologies.
Paul Ryan and the House could use some encouragement last I heard.
Did I miss something? Are the spending bills finished?
It’s true, ICANN lobbyists have lied time again.
It’s not clear what ICANN intends to do with .mil and .gov websites — keeping all of their options open for some reason.
If you check the key word: icann, you will find answers to all of those questions:
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/icann/index?tab=articles
But I’ll go over the .mil and .gov sites with you specifically.
ICANN Transition Even Endangers ‘.gov’ and ‘.mil’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3469586/posts
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/09-14-16-rosenzweig-testimony.
I focused a lot on Rosenzweig’s tesimony. He is a top-notch professional witness and has been deeply involved in the ICANN transition for two years.
1. Department of Homeland — former deputy assistant secretary for policy.
2. Currently he runs a consulting organization for Homeland.
3. Rosenzweig authored and edited numerous books on cyber-security and freedom of speech. [He also produced DVDs on those subjects.]
4. As for his politics, He’s been writing Heritage Foundation columns all the way back to 1977.
Here’s some of Rosenzweig’s testimony:
[When it wears you out, just scroll down to the line of stars. Then it hits you.]
The US government is delegated as the operator of the .Gov and .Mil top level domains. Rather than guaranteeing the permanent continuation of that role by way of contract, the NTIA and ICANN have chosen to exchange letters which, in the end, promise the US that ICANN will followits policy and notify the government before any re-delegation is made.
Thus, American control of .Gov and .Mil (which are essential to the continued stable operations ofAmerican government IT systems) is not assured by any enforceable mechanism.
[snip]
Today, the United States has exclusive use of the .mil and .gov domains. Allowing other governments orthe private sector to use these gTLDs poses security risks.
In a July 8th 2015 hearing held by the HouseEnergy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, when pressed about formalizing the informal agreement about .mil and .gov, Assistant Strickling stated, There is nothing in the transition of our stewardship which actually implicates .mil or.gov, and also .us, which we administer at the Department of Commerce. But we understand this is an issue of concern and so we will do whatever is appropriate, in consultation with the Department of Defense and GSA and the other agencies that haveequities in this, to make sure that these names are protected going forward.
We understand the importance of it. Today, they are not under any particular contract. These are legacy names that go back to the very beginning of the Internet. I think .mil was delegated back in 1984. That shows you how old it is. So there is no contract today, but there is a whole structure ofthese informal regulations within the Internet model that govern … There is no reason why they should change, but we are not going to rest there.
We are going to take a look at them and make sure that if there is a way we can strengthen theU.S. Government’s rights to those names, we will do so.14As the transition now looms, it is appropriate to look at the solution that the NTIA has adopted. Forsomething this critical I might have supposed that the US government would insist on an enforceablecontract or some other evidence of obligation. Instead according to NTIA,[P]er the policies, procedures, and practices in place, .mil and .gov cannot be transferredwithout explicit agreement first from the current administrators of those domains –namely, the U.S. government. However to address concerns that have been raised, NTIAand ICANN have formally reaffirmed that the U.S. government is the administrator of.mil and .gov and that any changes made to .mil or .gov can only be made with theexpress approval of the U.S. government.
****************************************
This reaffirmation was made through an exchange of letters. Not only are the letters non-legally binding, they actually acknowledge the possibility that at some point a separation of the IANA functionfrom ICANN might threaten the stability and security of the US government’s top level domains. I can’t speak for other observers, but for me, as a lawyer, an exchange of letters is a way of avoiding a contractually enforceable obligation. I know why ICANN would prefer that course of action – I have no idea why the NTIA would accept it on behalf of the US government.
This is the quick way to explain why ICANN is so dangerous.
They essentially ‘govern’ the TLDs [top level domains].
Each TLD [such as .com or .org] runs its own ‘phone directory’.
And ICANN controls them through ‘Registry Operator Code of Conduct’.
Right now ICANN is subject to US law, mainly because its headquarters are in the US. And that is why their codes of conduct are so light — restricted by US law.
But if ICANN’s contract isn’t renewed, it’s free to move overseas [which it secretly plans to] and modify its ‘Registry Operator Code of Conduct’ for each dot-com or dot-org or ...
... theoretically even our military websites.
From October on through to a republican president, there’s no telling how much the White House will coordinate with ICANN in the name of ‘no controlling legal authority’.
Thank you for the info. I am much more frightened now......our Congress had better put a stop to this or Internet freedom will be a thing of the past.
I believe that they will.
I am dreading the loss of freedom on the Internet if the USA loses control. Can someone explain what will actually happen if our Congress will not/cannot stop this transfer?
I am not sure anyone actually knows for sure what will happen or when if this transfer occurs...However, giving control to UN or China will not help free speech lovers like Freepers or Drudge as China and UN seek to limit free speech.
Also, the fact that Obama and Dems wants to do this and Trump, Bolton, Sessions, Cruz, Grassley, and others are concerned about this tells me that it is a bad move.
Numerous threads have been posted regarding this (see below). The most important things you can do are:
1. Call/Email/Tweet your Senators and ask them to bring vote on SB3031 PROTECTION OF INTERNET FREEDOM ACT to floor this week and vote yes for the bill.
2. Call/Email/Tweet your Congressional House Reps and ask them to bring vote on HR5418 PROTECTION OF INTERNET FREEDOM ACT to floor this week and vote yes for the bill.
3. Call/Email/Tweet Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and TELL THEM TO QUIT PLAYING POLITICS WITH OUR INTERNET!!
4. Call/Email/Tweet Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan and tell them you want PROTECTION OF INTERNET FREEDOM ACT (SB3031/HR5418) LANGUAGE IN THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION TO BE PASSED THIS WEEK.
5. Pray our elected “representatives” in DC have the brains to understand the seriousness of loss of control.
6. VOTE TRUMP!!! Trump supports a delay in any transfer of internet power.
John Bolton on Obama’s Internet Handover: ‘Within Ten Years, the Internet as We Know It Will End’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3472489/posts
Obama’s key internet giveaway advocate can’t give a straight answer on free speech concerns
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3472675/posts
BREAKING NEWS] Who oversees the internet? Will Congress delay Oct. 1 transfer?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3472322/posts
Donald Trump Comes Out Against Obama’s United Nations Internet Takeover
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3472239/posts
Is this a trick question?
Has the Republican Congress ever stopped Obama on anything? You will not recognize the Internet in 12 months.
Obama wants the Zika funding in the CR, if GOP puts in PROTECTION OF INTERNET FREEDOM ACT, this could be the seonc thing!!
Pelosi and Reid are playing politics with the bill...they need to be stopped!
There is no “cannot”, so it’s a matter of will. And the Uniparty’s will is the same as Obama’s will.
Paul Ryan and the House could use some encouragement last I heard.
Did I miss something? Are the spending bills finished?
Every Senator and Congresscritter could use some encouragement at this point.**
CALL/EMAIL/OR EVEN TWEET (MY NEW FAVORITE COMMUNICATION) YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BEFORE THURS!!! They are getting calls, though we need to give them more!!
**Except for Pelosi and Reid and Dems—they are PLAYING POLITICS WITH PROTECTION OF INTERNET FREEDOM ACT.
So they say. They say a lot of things. But actions and words are two different matters.
Duffy crew is working tirelessly to get HR5418 passed...He got 7 new sponsors last week. Uh, I have spoken to their offices...leadership is behind the bill.
Cruz is working on the SB3031.
Problem is not in the GOP...it is with Harry Reid, Pelosi, and the Dems.
With all due respect and I don’t mean to sound snarky, have YOU taken any action to stop the transfer? Or are you merely a keyboard warrior willing to complain about the state of things but not actually do anything to effect change...
You know what? We may not win this battle this week—no one knows the outcome; but regardless, I am confident that whatever pressure we can bring NOW will HELP TRUMP when he TAKES OFFICE because he has taken time to speak out that he is opposed to Internet Transfer, and he will need support of legislature to fix this mess as well as the many other messes left by this administration.
Please consider email/call/tweet your elected officials today.
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.