FCC Net Neutrality Back Stab

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Net Neutrality, it was argued, kept the Internet free.  According to the federal government they were protecting us from the mean old corporations who would start breaking the Internet up into tiers, and charge you to access certain things, like cable television companies do with channels they offer, and how they offer them.

However, now that net neutrality was ruled as being unconstitutional, the federal government voted in favor of advancing a proposal that will do exactly what they were warning us would happen if they weren't involved.

That is because it was never about the Internet, and all about their perceived federal powers.

In reality, the less the government has to do with the internet, the better the innovation may be on the horizon.  The free market works best without interference.  If a tiered system is best, the market will embrace it.  If it is not popular with consumers, it will be rejected.  For the hope of profit, quality will improve.  Deals will be made.  Incentive brings innovation.

The whole thing is that it shouldn't have required federal approval in the first place.  In fact, the FCC is an unconstitutional agency.  There is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes the federal government to have any control over communications of information transfer.

If it is important, and if it is necessary for the federal government to have this kind of authority, then rather than seizing the power through creating an unconstitutional agency, and enforcing unconstitutional regulations, the Constitution should have been amended through an appropriate proposal, and State ratification.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said of this latest revelation, "There is one Internet. It must be fast, it must be robust, and it must be open. The prospect of a gatekeeper choosing winners and losers on the Internet is unacceptable."

Yet, is that not what the FCC is positioning itself to be?  Is not the federal government saying it is the gatekeeper that will choose winners and losers on the Internet, and decide how the industry will evolve?

That is how the federal government works.  They claim they are protecting you from predators, so that they can position themselves to be the predator.

Wheeler's proposal is part of a larger "net neutrality" plan that forbids Internet service providers from outright blocking Web sites. And he promised a series of measures to ensure the new paid prioritization practices are done fairly and don't harm consumers. The agency said it had developed a "multifaceted dispute resolution process" on enforcement and would consider appointing an "ombudsman" to oversee the process.

This all coming from the same federal government that brings you the highly functional postal service, and Obamacare website.

The telecom companies argue that without being able to charge tech firms for higher-speed connections, they will be unable to invest in faster connections for consumers.

In other words, the federal government has been standing in the way of innovation.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

FCC Approves Plan to Consider Paid Priority on Internet - Washington Post