[atlarge-discuss] Revolving-door Ethics Ordinance

["Jkhan" <Jkhan@MetroMgr.com>]

Bruce,

To place this type of moratorium on future elections is crucial to the
process of development. The measure would provide a 'vent' for a venue of
ideas to progress. Without this I fear that many good ideas will be
Submarined.
--
> Do you envision a specific time period of one year, as in
> the example?

I tend to feel that two years (2 yrs.) maybe better, because there is no way
to follow-up on abuse which is orchestrated through a group's legacy.
--
> Also, does this mean you do not endorse a two-term limit for Panel members
> as originally envisioned?

If the People endorse a Candidate for two consecutive terms, the two-term
limit is fine.
It is the 'Post term Activity which requires a 'Cooling-Off' period which
prohibits the Service as an ex-officio.
--
A related issue is the: Disclosure Statements of Conflicts of Interest.
Candidates and Lobbyist should be required to post disclosing Statements
which reflect there ties to: Governments, Industry, and Affiliates.

For example in California,
a.. The State's Chief Elections Officer; administers and enforces elections
laws and keeps records of all campaign and lobbyist disclosure statements
required under the Political Reform Act.
a.. Files official documents relating to corporations, trademarks, the
Uniform Commercial Code, notaries public and limited partnerships.

This was designed to disclose and assure that Candidate's information is
made public, from a Candidacy side and Business interest side.  Granted this
may seem a bit much for our needs, but there is a profound policy
established here.

James Khan
Sonoma, California USA


----- Original Message -----
From: <bruce@barelyadequate.info>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 10:56 PM
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] Revolving-door Ethics Ordinance


> James Khan wrote:
>
> |  Its time to invoke a 'revolving door' restriction on former
> |  Executive members , this include: former Panel members, persons
> |  elected to or placed on the DNSO, IDNO, NSO, ICANN, ITU, WTO, and WIPO.
>
> I can back this.  Do you envision a specific time period of one year, as
in
> the example?
>
> Also, does this mean you do not endorse a two-term limit for Panel members
> as originally envisioned?
> I don't have a particular problem with that either, but I'm curious to
hear
> your thinking.
>
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon USA
> bruce@barelyadequate.info
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.org and Join ICANN At Large!
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de