[Chapter-delegates] ISOC's access to Administration & lobbyists creates opportunity to ask questions

[Dave Burstein]

Folks

Because the IGF USA is on the web Wednesday and Thursday, anyone will have
an opportunity to send questions to the kind of DC powers that are usually
hard to question. (I hope they have time for plenty of questions.)

ISOC-IGF has very close ties to powers that be in DC. Thus, In 2019, the
three keynotes were Diane Rinaldo of the Dept of Commerce, Christine Wilson
of the Federal Trade Commission, and Rob Strayer of the Department of
State. In 2018, the two keynotes were David J. Redl of NTIA and Noah J.
Phillips FTC. I'm sure you have your own opinion of the current US
administration.

In IGF 2020, that includes FCC Chair Ajit Pai, David Redl (First NTIA
DIrector of the current administration,) Christopher Krebs of Homeland
Security, Sujit Raman of the Department of Justice, and Diane Rinaldo, ex
NTIA/Dept of Commerce,

Lobbyists Policy advocates include Miranda Bogen of Facebook, Paul Eisler
of US Telecom, Ashley Heineman of GoDaddy, Robert H. Mayer
of USTelecom, Katie Oyama of Google/YouTube, & Chris Wilson of Amazon.
======================

I strongly believe ISOC should be open to ideas from right-wingers,
although that is not my point of view. Let me point to important positions
some of the above have taken to make clear this is not an attempt to
suppress the Trump supporters.

Pai, who is a brilliant master of telecom regulation, has opened up 1200
MHz of spectrum for Wi-Fi and unlicensed use. This is one of the most
important policy decisions in the last decade.

Pai also made a courageous speech about the value of immigration to
America, citing his parents. If his boss, Donald Trump, had paid attention
to that speech, Pai might have lost his job. I believe I was the only
reporter who reported it.

David Redl, Trump's first choice to oversee the Internet as head of NTIA,
made a point at a Columbia University webinar of saying the pandemic made
clear the US should find a way to connect everyone and that he hoped to
convince DC of the importance. At that webinar, I made a point of thanking
Redl for saying the Democratic plans for the broadband stimulus weren't
going to work. He was right; we spent $7 billion and so few of the unserved
were reached NTIA and RUS consistently refused to release a figure.
--------------------

Some questions I would ask, to bring less visible but important issues to
the fore

Pai:

How much have broadband prices gone up in your term? What policy choices
would achieve your goal of making broadband affordable for all? (Prices are
up ~15%, but data is limited.)

Redl:

What are practical steps to deliver broadband at home to all
schoolchildren, quickly?

Raman:

ISOC has a strong position against changing section 230 or requiring
companies to monitor speech. What other effective policy tools does the
government have to minimize hateful speech, direct and indirect incitements
to violence or racism, wrong and possibly dangerous information about
vaccines and coronavirus, etc.?

Rinaldo:

The US has supported ICANN as the arbiter of some basic global Internet
functions, but ICANN continues to exclude more than a third of the Internet
from the board or policymaking staff. How can we persuade ICANN to stop
fighting the cold war before it forces an Internet split?
(No mainland Chinese has been among the hundreds of board members and
recent senior staff. China is 25% to 40% of the Internet by different
measures. Excluding them is contributing to the unfortunate split in the
Internet.)

Google & Amazon reps:
How do we induce web giants to pay fair taxes in the countries they operate
in, especially the less affluent?

(The web giants have been resisting paying fair taxes in most of the world,
including a current battle in India. Taxes are avoided by claiming British,
Indian, and other income is not national and moving income to tax havens
and ultimately the US. This is one of the drivers of digital sovereignty
and lack of trust in the Internet.)

All lobbyists:

About how much has your company, its PAC, and your leaders contributed in
the last three years to Trump and other Republicans who oppose diversity
efforts and most policies helping the less affluent?

(If the number is large, we should laugh out loud at the same companies'
support for diversity and equality.)

All lobbyists:

Should ISOC and IGF choose speakers without regard to prospective donations?

(Speakers at IGF planning meetings have suggested avoiding topics because
"our donors might  object." There is a major overlap between speakers and
donors at IGF.

This is especially sensitive now because ISOC's board has endorsed finding
new funding. By far the easiest and most effective way to raise money,
especially in DC, is to shill for corporate interests. Some in ISOC admit
that directly - "Our chapter agrees with you on [a net neutrality proposal]
but we can't say so because we want Verizon to fund our next meeting."
Competent executives make a point of never saying things like that
directly, of course.)
------------------------

The IGF planners in DC have chosen far two many government spokesmen and
lobbyists. This makes it hard to persuade people we are truly independent.

If we want to have another IGF USA, we need to move it out of DC or make it
very clear it's not our role to feature lobbyists or the US Gov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20200721/83732bbc/attachment.htm>