As an aside, on reading the 120 comments previously submitted on this matter on this webpage, it is clear that the vast majority of them are coming from the same milieu (almost exclusively from collectors of and dealers in dugup ancient coins), and the degree of utter misunderstanding of the nature and purpose of the regulations applied by the CCPIA (and the purpose of the Convention itself) seen in them is striking. It would be helpful if the CPAC’s report on its deliberations could remark upon this, and urge that funding be found to fulfil the recommendations of part of Article 10 of the Convention to provide outreach to the US public and the US ancient-coin-collecting milieu in particular, aiming to educate and inform them better to lead to a fuller “realization of the value of cultural property”, what it is and how it is defined “and the threat to the cultural heritage created by theft, clandestine excavations and illicit exports”. This should outline for them how the measures proposed by the 1970 Convention and the legislative implementation of those proposals by the US are intended to function to combat that threat, and why responsible collectors should be supporting them and not merely parroting the words of those who profit from this trade.
And, of course, this follows of series of posts wherein the same archaeo-blogger mocks the public comments of a number of collectors and members of the small businesses of the numismatic trade who are rightly concerned about the impact import restrictions have on their hobby and business.
Is this the type of "debate about the issues" the archaeological community seeks to foster? Let's hope not, but sadly his nasty comments directed at those with whom he disagrees are widely linked in the archaeological blogs of others with far greater academic accomplishments. They, at least, should know better.