<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [spam] Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Milestone report update
- To: Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [spam] Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Milestone report update
- From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:27:30 -0400
Tijani,
My participation in ICANN-40 was via remote, and the available
bandwidth and name resolution* was not as condusive to remote
participation as it was during the Nairobi meeting, for reasons
unrelated to the venue network provider, or the venue regional network
infrastructure. I did not participate in the meeting of those
physically present at ICANN-40, and so the basis for the exchange of
views between you and co-chair Rafik is not directly known to me.
I write because in reading your note one phrase caught my attention.
It is this:
I am personally against specific treatment for governmental para-statal
applications as they have more channels and possibilities to get funding from
several sources compared to NGO for example.
I've been reading the literature on the abilities of Tribal
Governments (in the United States) to issue bonds, and the conclusion
I'm coming to is that there is a qualitative difference between the
abilities of governments inferior to the federal government, from
sewer districts to municipalities to states and trans-state regions,
and Federally Recognized Indian Tribes (a term of art in US law), and
that this difference is quantitatively sufficient to support the
thesis that Federally Recognized Indian Tribes generally, though
situated interior to a highly developed national economy, which
includes highly developed tax exempt public and non-exempt private
means of financing the normal activities of government, lack, by the
express intent of the surrounding national government, meaningful
access to those means of financing the normal activities of government.
Sorry for the long sentence. In short form, tribal governments are
barred from issuing tax exempt bonds, for the range of activities that
non-tribal governments are allowed, and so have fewer means of
financing a .tribe than any city has of financing a .city. Again, this
is all US specific, and I'll post a paper on the subject in April.
I've no idea if a similar situation exists in Canada, or Mexico, or
elsewhere in the Americas, or if similar tax constructs or more
general rights and privileges available to polities arising from the
colonial enterprise are not available to surviving pre-existing polities.
My point I suppose is that on average, surviving pre-colonial
governments are likely to have lesser, rather than greater, access to
capital, than post-colonial NGOs.
Eric
* The TimeWarner nameservers for central New York failed several times
during the week of ICANN-40, on two occasions for several hours. This
had the effect of making the web interface for remote participation
unreachable, leaving only the skype (doesn't use DNS) communications
channels as reliable means of communication.
TimeWarner nameservice and routing in central New York also failed
during the composition of this note.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|