[governance] Sense of the Senate Resolution

[McTim]

Hi Robert,

On 10/20/05, Robert Guerra <rguerra at lists.privaterra.org> wrote:
> Adam:
>
>
> The sense of the senate resolution is a clear indication of one thing

It hasn't passed... yet

> - that politicians

one politician at least, who has taken the "Jesse Helms role" in the
Senate as UN basher.

> discussions are taking place on the issue of internet governance.
>
> The fact that the resolution comes from the senate and from a
> conservative should not be lost.  Perhaps due to the administration,
> or press - or both - we likely find ourselves in a situation that the
> US position is far firmer, and much less flexible than we had at PC3.

I think we have known this since July, and it is the result of WSIS
media coverage that highlighted ICANN vs. UN.

> In summary:
>
> - lowered expectations :  The EU, Brazil and others - is they are
> smart enough, should have known this was a possibility. As a
> consequence are expectations set so low that any result is a success?

This (low expectations) is a useful thing IMO.

> - So how does this WG wish to respond. Does it wish to accept the
> reality that the USG position is firmer and accept it, try to
> mediate, or ignore and go on pushing for internalization.

I think we have to accept it, and offer status quo minus.

> Can the forum save things...?

Out of scope for me ;-)

--
Cheers,

McTim
nic-hdl:      TMCG

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance