Comments on: It’s all fun and games until someone mentions ITAR

By: Scott Skinner

Scott Skinner — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 17:38:57 +0000

Thank you for blogging on ITAR. Are you able to share a copy of Kerry Scarlott’s ITAR presentation?

By: Ethel Kennedy

Ethel Kennedy — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:59:17 +0000

Duncan Hunter’s running for President? Well lordy day, that IS good news. For when every other viable candidate dies in a tragic blimp over the Rose Bowl, he’ll be a shoe-in for the White House. And I, of all people, should know.

Rand my boy, you are onto to something for once. Good job, Simberg!

By: Ryan Zelnio

Ryan Zelnio — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:41:02 +0000

It always bothers me when people claim that only republicans have the “moral authority” to change ITAR. The basis for this argument is that ITAR is all about containing China’s space program. And like the belief that only a republican, Nixon, could open relations with China, that only a republican can thus change ITAR policy. This belief is bolstered as those blocking ITAR reform are major China hawks like Rep. Duncan Hunter and Sen. John Kyl. And so long as the battle over ITAR continues to be dominated by the belief of containing China, people will continue to believe that only a republican can control the issue.

With all respect to the panel, I believe they are mischaracterizing the problem and that the key is issue definition. So long as ITAR (when I say ITAR, I am referring to it in terms of its control over space technology) is defined as the primary means for containing China’s space program, the China hawks in the republican party will continue to own the issue. However, if ITAR reform is defined as preserving America’s national security by ensuring the dominance of our space technology (like CSIS tries to define it), then the issue is taken away from the China hawks and is given to those interested in seeing that US industry dominates the global marketplace. This group of people are both republican and democrat and are for defining space technology as a dual-use export under commerce’s control and not a munitions under ITAR control.

A golden rule in policy studies is “Whoever formulates the issue, determines it outcome” and I believe this rule applies here.

By: Jack Kennedy

Jack Kennedy — Sat, 24 Mar 2007 17:29:07 +0000

Perhaps the ITAR amendment advocates should look at the last serious effort to amend the law. There were several patrons and co-patrons on the bill. One was my Congressman, 24-year veteran Democrat Rick Boucher. I have discussed with Congressman Boucher of the need to look at the ITAR regime again. He has expressed willingness to co-patron such a bill again but would not be the chief patron due to the amount of work that confronts him on the House Commerce and Energy Committee and the subcommittee on air quality that he chairs. As a pro-carbon coal-ming district, he is now at the epicenter of climate change debate. Nonetheless, Rick is extremely savvy on technology, satellite, and Internet related policy issues. He could make a difference in the majority caucus.

By: Get out and Go! » Itâ€™s all fun and games until someone mentions ITAR

Get out and Go! » Itâ€™s all fun and games until someone mentions ITAR — Sat, 24 Mar 2007 15:28:55 +0000

[…] Original post by unknown […]