[CCWG-ACCT] FW: Chairman Thune and Senator Schatz letter to Steve Crocker ahead of ICANN 54

[James Gannon]

Agreed that was also my reading.

-jg




On 16/10/2015, 2:32 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Salaets, Ken" <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on behalf of ksalaets at 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 at 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 at 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 at icann.org
>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Dr
>> Eberhard W Lisse
>> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 9:03 AM
>> To: 'Accountability Cross Community'
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>> Cc: Lisse Eberhard <directors at 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 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>_______________________________________________
>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community