CCP: Reform U.S. Law and Policy on Cultural Property (2)

An interesting section of the Committee for Cultural Policy's "White Paper": A Proposal to Reform U.S. Law and Policy Relating to the International Exchange of Cultural Property is the part (p. 4) where it discusses a register: 

 5. Create an Electronic Database of Objects to Encourage Transparency, Restore Liquidity and Provide Repose. A universally accessible database of objects should be created that would encourage transparency among market participants, motivate claimants to come forward, and restore legitimacy and value to non-1970 compliant objects that have been chilled by the AAMD's 1970 Rule. A database of privately-owned objects is feasible today, but passage into law is preferable to remove any doubt as to whether its terms and conditions would be binding on foreign and domestic governments and agencies.

Elsewhere he talks of:

the creation of a privately-held object database that can be set up now but that should have the benefit of law to ensure that its terms are binding on all participants, including foreign countries and U.S. and state governments.

It is notable that this proposal only appears in the 'open letter' preceding the main body of text of the "White Paper" and no further justifications and details are provided, which rather hinders discussing the idea. This was one of the proposals (later dropped) of Arthur Houghton's so-called Cultural Property Research Institute and it is interesting to see the matter raised again here. Since this paper proposes changes in "U.S. Law and Policy Relating to the International Exchange of Cultural Property" it is fair to infer that this database is US-based and refers (primarily?) to objects in current US collections. What therefore is meant by "and restore legitimacy and value to non-1970 compliant objects that have been chilled by the AAMD's 1970 Rule"? In what way does listing objects which cannot be documented as out of the ground and legally imported (or as having been out of the ground and/or exportedbefore 1970) "legitimise" them? What "terms and conditions" does Mr Pearlstein see as being imposed on "foreign and domestic governments and agencies"? In what way does the author envisage this mere listing of these objects in the US as "restoring Liquidity" and "Providing Repose"?

It would seem these proposals need reworking to make the intentions of the author clearer.