[CCWG-ACCT] FW: ICYMI: Sen. Cruz Leads Bicameral Letter Asking GAO to Determine Whether Obama Administration Has Power to Give Away the Internet

Carlos Raul Gutierrez crg at isoc-cr.org
Mon Sep 28 22:25:25 UTC 2015


Is this the so called constitutional moment???
On Sep 28, 2015 11:55 AM, "Paul Rosenzweig" <
paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:

> The below from Senator Cruz is self-explanatory.  I have no doubt it will
> make Dr. Lisse very happy.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> <paul.rosenzweigesq at 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&id=19&Itemid=9>
>
>
>
> ICYMI- U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), along with Senate Judiciary
> Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), House Judiciary Committee
> Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Chairman
> of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and
> the Internet, sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
> requesting an affirmative determination of whether the Obama
> Administration’s plan to transfer U.S. oversight of the Internet violates
> the Constitution.
>
>
>
> *The Wall Street Journal'*s columnist L. Gordon Crovitz reported on the
> letter today in his Information Age column, “Not Obama’s to Give Away.”
> <http://www.wsj.com/articles/not-obamas-to-give-away-1443386189>
>
>
>
> *From:* Press, Cruz (Cruz)
> *Sent:* Monday, September 28, 2015 11:54 AM
> *Subject:* RELEASE: Sen. Cruz Leads Bicameral Letter Asking GAO to
> Determine Whether Obama Administration Has Power to Give Away the Internet
>
>
>
> *UNITED STATES SENATE*
>
> *Sen. Ted Cruz Press Office*
>
>
>
> *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE*
>
> *Cruz Press Office: 202-228-7561 <202-228-7561>*
>
> Phil Novack: phil_novack at cruz.senate.gov
>
> September 28, 2015
>
>
>
> *Sen. Cruz Leads Bicameral Letter Asking GAO to Determine Whether Obama
> Administration Has Power to Give Away the Internet*
>
> *Judiciary Chairmen Grassley and Goodlatte, with Rep. Issa, join Cruz to
> get answers on whether Administration’s plan violates the Constitution*
>
>
>
> WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), along with Senate
> Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), House Judiciary
> Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), and Rep. Darrell Issa
> (R-Calif.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts,
> Intellectual Property, and the Internet, sent a letter to the Government
> Accountability Office (GAO) requesting an affirmative determination of
> whether the Obama Administration’s plan to transfer U.S. oversight of the
> Internet violates the Constitution.
>
>
>
> *The Wall Street Journal'*s columnist L. Gordon Crovitz reported on the
> letter today in his Information Age column, “Not Obama’s to Give Away.”
> <http://www.wsj.com/articles/not-obamas-to-give-away-1443386189>
>
>
>
> Sen. Cruz said: “Under Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, Congress
> has the exclusive power ‘to dispose of and make all needful rules and
> regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the
> United States.’ If the contract governing U.S. oversight of the Internet is
> indeed government property, the Administration’s intention to cede control
> to the ‘global stakeholder community’ -- including nations like Iran,
> Russia and China that do not value free speech and in fact seek to stifle
> it -- is in violation of the Constitution and should be stopped.”
>
>
>
> The letter is being sent at a time when efforts by both the Administration
> and Congress, via the DOTCOM Act, are underway to facilitate the transition
> of U.S. control over the Internet without an affirmative vote from
> Congress. In another action to protect U.S. control of the Internet, Sen.
> Cruz recently filed the DOTCOM Act
> <http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2402> as an amendment to
> the highway reauthorization bill the Senate considered in July. Cruz's
> amendment is identical to the original version of the DOTCOM Act being
> considered by the Senate with one exception: it would require Congress to
> have an affirmative up or down vote on the Obama Administration's plan to
> give away the Internet.
>
>
>
> Read the full text of the Cruz-Grassley-Goodlatte-Issa letter here
> <http://cruz.senate.gov/files/documents/Letters/20150922%20Grassley%20Cruz%20Goodlatte%20Issa%20GAO%20Request%20ICANN.pdf> and
> below:
>
> September 22, 2015
>
>
>
> Mr. Gene Dodaro
>
> Comptroller General
>
> U.S. Government Accountability Office
>
> 441 G Street, N.W.
>
> Washington, DC  20548
>
>
>
>  Dear Mr. Dodaro:
>
>
>
> On March 14, 2014, the National Telecommunications and Information
> Administration (“NTIA”) announced its intent to relinquish oversight of
> Internet domain name functions to the “global stakeholder community.”  This
> proposed transition raises questions about NTIA’s authority to transfer
> possession and control of critical components of the Internet’s
> infrastructure to a third party.
>
>
>
> The Internet as we know it has evolved from a network infrastructure first
> created by Department of Defense researchers. One key component of that
> infrastructure is the root zone file, which the federal government
> currently designates as a “national IT asset.”[1] Creation of the root zone
> file was funded by the American taxpayer and coordinated by the Department
> of Defense, and the file has remained under United States control ever
> since.
>
>
>
> Under Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, Congress has the
> exclusive power “to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations
> respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United
> States.”  One question arising from NTIA’s decision to transfer its
> Internet oversight functions to a third party is whether NTIA may
> relinquish possession and control of the root zone file—or any other
> similar component of the Internet that was financed and developed by the
> United States—without authorization from Congress.  This concern was raised
> in 2000 by the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”), which questioned
> whether NTIA could relinquish authority over the root zone file and
> concluded that it was “unclear whether such a transition would involve a
> transfer of government property to a private entity.”[2] The 2000 GAO
> report further detailed that the Department of Commerce advised the GAO at
> the time that “we have not devoted the possibly substantial staff resources
> that would be necessary to develop a legal opinion as to whether
> legislation would be necessary” to authorize transfer of the root zone
> file. Congress should be made aware of the legal status of the root zone
> file—or any other potential government property—before it makes any final
> decisions about whether to transfer the government’s Internet oversight
> functions to a third party.
>
>
>
> Some observers and parties involved in the proposed transfer have asserted
> that the termination of NTIA’s contract with ICANN would not result in the
> transfer of United States Government property.[3] Others believe that
> termination of this contract would result in government property being
> transferred to ICANN and point to a number of factors that would indicate
> that the root zone file and other contractual deliverables are property of
> the United States.  Supporters of this position point to the fact that the
> United States acquired title to the root zone file because it was invented
> pursuant to Department of Defense contracts.[4]  In addition, the United
> States has long claimed ownership or control over the root zone file.  For
> example, President Clinton’s Internet “czar” Ira Magaziner asserted United
> States ownership of the entire Domain Name System because “[t]he United
> States paid for the Internet, the Net was created under its auspices, and
> most importantly everything [researchers] did was pursuant to government
> contracts.”[5] Additionally the Commerce Department’s contract with ICANN
> explicitly declares that “[a]ll deliverables provided under this contract,”
> including the “automated root zone,” are “the property of the U.S.
> government.”[6] And Verisign and ICANN contracts make clear that changes to
> the root zone file cannot be made without approval of the Department of
> Commerce.[7] Congress has also been actively engaged in managing the root
> zone file.  Recently, it enacted the Consolidated and Further Continuing
> Appropriations Act of 2015, which explicitly prohibited the Commerce
> Department from using federal funds to relinquish stewardship of the domain
> name system, “including responsibility with respect to the authoritative
> root zone file.”[8]
>
>
>
> Given this history, we are concerned that NTIA might potentially
> relinquish ownership of some form of United States property. To inform the
> Congress so that it may take any necessary and appropriate steps regarding
> NTIA’s planned transition of the IANA functions, we would like the GAO to
> conduct a review to address a number of specific questions.
>
>
>
> 1. Would the termination of the NTIA’s contract with ICANN cause
> Government property, of any kind, to be transferred to ICANN?
>
> 2. Is the authoritative root zone file, or other related or similar
> materials or information, United States government property?
>
> 3. If so, does the NTIA have the authority to transfer the root zone file
> or, other related materials or information to a non-federal entity?
>
>
>
> Please include in this report a description and analysis of the relevant
> legal authorities and case law dealing with the transfer of United States
> Government property. We understand that to perform this work, GAO will need
> to conduct both significant audit work and complex legal analysis.
>
>
>
> Please contact Jonathan Nabavi (Chairman Grassley), Sean McLean (Senator
> Cruz), Vishal Amin (Chairman Goodlatte), and Veronica Wong (Congressman
> Issa) of our staffs if there are questions regarding this request.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________
> _________________________
>
>
>
> Charles E.
> Grassley                                                                Ted
> Cruz
>
> Chairman
> United States Senator
>
> Senate Committee on the Judiciary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________
> __________________________
>
>
>
> Bob
> Goodlatte
> Darrell Issa
>
> Chairman
>                                                             Member of
> Congress
>
> House Committee on the Judiciary
>
>
>
> [1]See, Verisign Company Information:
> http://www.verisign.com/en_US/company-information/index.xhtml
>
> [2]U.S. Government Accountability Office., GAO-B-284206, Department of
> Commerce: Relationship with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers (2000)
>
> [3]Letter from Lawrence Strickling, Assistant Sec’y for Commc’ns and
> Info., U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, to Representative Sean Duffy &
> Representative James Sensenbrenner, U.S. House of Representatives (June 11,
> 2015)
>
> [4]U.S. Congressional Research Service. Internet Governance and the Domain
> Name System: Issues for Congress (R42351; August 18, 2015), by Lennard G.
> Kruger
>
> [5]Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Who Controls the Internet?: Illusions of a
> Borderless World 41 (2006)
>
> [6]Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Functions Contract between U.S.
> Department of Commerce and Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers. Contract Number SA1301-12-CN-0035. October 1, 2012.
>
> [7]See, Amendment 11 of the Cooperative Agreement NCR-9218742 between the
> U.S. Department of Commerce and Verisign, Inc. Also see, Internet Assigned
> Numbers Authority Functions Contract between U.S. Department of Commerce
> and Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Contract Number
> SA1301-12-CN-0035. October 1, 2012.
>
> [8]Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Pub. L.
> No 113-235, § 540, 128 Stat. 2130, 2217 (Dec. 16, 2014)
>
>
>
>
>
> ###
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150928/557ef2b5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19460 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150928/557ef2b5/image001.png>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list