FYI:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Giveaways to Corporations- by Ralph Nader
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:44:30 -0400
From: enrique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GIVEAWAYS
The U.S. federal government is quite probably the richest property owner
on earth. The government owns vast tracts of land, including oil and
mineral riches, forests, thousands of buildings and plants, the public
airwaves and much more.
Because they often do not appear as budgetary debit items, government
giveaways too frequently escape the corporate welfare stigma. Giveaways
are in fact one of the purest forms of corporate welfare -- a
something-for-nothing, or something-for-too-little, proposition. The level
of public outrage would be high if the government wrote a $70 billion check
to the broadcast industry -- but that is effectively what happened when the
Federal Communications Commission, pursuant to the Telecommunications Act
of 1996, handed over the digital television spectrum to existing broadcasters.
The government retains its property as the shared commonwealth of the
people of the United States, and there should be a strong presumption
against giving it away. Where a reasoned decision is made to distribute
some of that wealth to private parties, the government should explore
whether it can distribute the public assets in a non-exclusive,
public-purpose way, or in a fashion that promotes competition. When public
assets are going to be distributed to private parties, there should be a
strong presumption that the government should receive a market-rate
purchase or lease price; and where taxpayer assets are to be distributed to
a narrow class of beneficiaries, below-market purchase or rental rates
should be accepted only in the most compelling of circumstances. Finally,
prior to transfer or government property to private parties, the government
should consider whether there are non-monetary reciprocal obligations that
should be demanded of recipients -- these may include everything ranging
from binding promises to adhere to higher environmental standards to
contributing equipment to support noncommercial television.
With stealth government giveaways of public assets, such as the internet
naming rights discussed below, accelerating, there is an urgent need for
the adoption of procedural and substantive protections to prevent the
looting of the commonwealth.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Internet Giveaways--by Ralph Nader
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:54:55 -0400
From: enrique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Internet Giveaways
An evolving giveaway of public assets involves the management of the U.S.
government's internet assets. The federal government currently contracts
with Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI), to manage certain domain name
registrations. After entering into the contract in 1993, NSI was later
acquired by SAIC for $3.9 million, and subsequently was permitted to charge
U.S. consumers wildly excessive fees for registering internet domain
names. NSI's monopoly on the .com and other valuable domain names has
turned a tiny initial investment into a firm with a market capitalization
of $2.5 billion -- thanks to control of the power to sell the public the
right to use their own domain names. At no time did the government seek
any competitive bids to determine the prices that consumers and business
should pay for domain name registrations. As public resentment over the
high prices and poor service have grown, the government is now trying to
find ways to introduce competition. But NSI is using its monopoly profits
to lobby the Congress and the executive branch to maintain its monopoly.
As the Administration seeks to replace the current NSI monopoly with
something new, it is using its earlier mistakes as a rationale for a new
government giveaway that could create an entirely new set of governance
problems for the public. Currently the Administration is negotiating a
transfer of the "A DNS root server" to ICANN, a private non-profit
organization. The new non-profit organization seeks the authority to
impose fees on all internet domain names, to set international policy on
trademarks and other issues, and to launch an undefined set of policy
initiatives that it will fund from fees assessed on domain
registrations. This new initiative raises a number of questions regarding
its lack of accountability, and it is justified largely on the basis that
the NSI monopoly needs to be "fixed." But it is hard to see how the
creation of a new unaccountable body constitutes a "fix."
###
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello,
New Media Strategies
------------------------------------
http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480
Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World
------------------------------------------------
"Where the people fear the government there is tyranny;
where the government fears the people there is liberty."
-- Thomas Jefferson
