ICANN has been a successful experiment - it has shown us that some of our most deeply held concepts of Constitutional government are at risk.

ICANN has shown us that some administrative agencies of the United States lack the understanding that under our Constitutional structure such agencies have little, if any, authority except that which is received via delegations from Congress and the Executive.

ICANN has shown us that a public-benefit and tax exempt corporation is liable to be captured by those who think of the public less as something to be benefited than as a body of consumers from whom a profit may be made.

The actions of the US Department of Commerce and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration with respect to ICANN and the Internet have been lacking in a proper respect for the concept of a government of limited powers.  Administrative agencies should be prepared to clearly and precisely articulate the source of their authority for their actions.  I have been asking NTIA for such an articulation for several years and have yet to receive an substantive answer.  It seems that Congress' own General Accounting Office has had a similar difficulty in finding a source of authority for the Department of Commerce's actions with regard to many parts of its relationship with ICANN.

The Internet is seductive.  Because the Internet is new and technical there is much room to dissemble public policy as technology.  Because the Internet recognizes few borders, it is easy for subtle controls to have broad impact.  And the Internet, being new, is unclaimed territory upon which a creative administrative agency may plant its flag and expand its powers.

My first suggestion today is that Congress take care that the Internet does not serve as a means by which Federal administrative agencies slip their leash and assume unwarranted and undelegated powers.

My second suggestion today is that Congress take care that Federal administrative agencies do not try to do an end-run around their limited powers by outsourcing jobs to private bodies such as ICANN.

The role of ICANN is important.  An ICANN-like body is necessary for the smooth and orderly allocation of certain types of network resources.  I support the existence of ICANN.  However, I feel that for ICANN to fulfill its role it needs substantial reformation.

However, ICANN has assumed the role of a quasi-governmental body but without any of the inconveniences imposed by things like the the Constitutional requirement of Due Process, the Federal Administrative Procedures Act, or judicial review.

Because ICANN acts in many respects as a combination supranational legislature, executive, and judiciary all rolled into one, it is an attractive focal point for business interests that want to enhance their interests without having to bother with making their case before the legislatures of the several nations of the world.