Regulatory classification

[Commentary] Network neutrality rules are needed to protect individuals against cable companies and other giant internet service providers that want to put their own profits ahead of the public interest in a free and open internet where anybody can communicate and compete on an equal playing field. They want network neutrality protections removed so they can tilt the rules of the game in their own favor, and in favor of other giant internet companies that have the deep pockets to pay them for special treatment online.

Network neutrality protections are good not only for consumers, but they’re also vital to ensure competition and innovation in all the tens of thousands of competitive marketplaces that depend on an even playing field—such as travel services. They are also vital to ensure that everyone can communicate without interference by those who run the communications network.

[Jay Stanley is senior policy analyst for the Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at the American Civil Liberties Union.]

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission’s proposed rollback of its 2015 Open Internet Order has put the term “net neutrality” back in the political zeitgeist. The phrase itself is more strategic marketing than precise meaning, but understanding that all it really means is heavy-handed government regulation of the internet makes it clear that net neutrality policy is bad for broadband consumers.

The net neutrality debate has little to do with making the internet open for users to go where they wish online. Americans have always enjoyed that liberty, even before the Open Internet Order was passed. Internet service providers have every incentive to provide that freedom to their customers.

[Jessica Melugin is an adjunct fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington]

In an effort to better understand the challenges facing rural broadband internet service providers, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai has been traveling west from Milwaukee (WI) toward Wyoming for the past week, making stops in rural towns across America. On June 9, he made a stop at Black Hills State University for a roundtable discussion with area telecommunications stakeholders. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-SD) was also in attendance.

Asked, "Can you speak a little bit about the FCC’s efforts to increase broadband service to rural areas as it relates to closing the digital divide between rural and urban areas?" Chairman Pai said, "This to me is the No. 1 issue that we need to be focused on." Asked, "There’s been a pretty consistent characterization of you as an enemy of net neutrality. What’s your reaction to this label? Is it wrong?" Chairman Pai said, "I would hope that people of goodwill would focus on the facts, and the facts are that everyone supports a free and open internet....No one is talking about leaving consumers to the mercy of any competitive monopolist. All we’re talking about is how to best preserve that core value of the open internet and preserve the incentive to invest in the networks going forward."

[Commentary] Over the last month, the Federal Communications Commission received 2.6 million public comments critical of Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to roll back President Obama’s "network neutrality" rules. This outpouring of public sentiment must be evidence of participatory democracy at it best, right? Not quite. A sizable percentage of these comments appear to be fake. What the net neutrality comment debacle underscores is that the Internet age may mean the collapse of the public comment process, at least for significant public policy issues.

Sophisticated bots and automated comment platforms can create thousands and thousands of comments from senders who may or may not be real. Most rulemaking pertains to subject matter that is less widely-watched than net neutrality, and usually concerns only a small sliver of the public. The public comment process has some virtues and should continue. It is time to recognize, however, that for rulemaking over issues on the scale of net neutrality, with entrenched and vocal participants on both sides of the aisle, the public comment process has become a farce.

[Peter Flaherty is president of the National Legal and Policy Center.]

[Commentary] The innovation economy needs competition, unfettered access for consumers and innovative flexibility. Working together, Congress should surprise the country, remove the politics from setting broadband internet standards and get something done most Americans can agree on.

[Jamal Simmons is a political analyst and a co-chairman of the DC-based Internet Innovation Alliance (IIA).]

[Commentary] Network neutrality, adopted by the Federal Communications Commission during the Obama presidency, was the first step in transitioning the internet into a government-run monopoly. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is intent on returning the internet back to its roots, cutting out unnecessary regulations - most of which have been foisted on the American people over the past two years. Recently, the FCC voted to overturn the net neutrality rules. While the commission was voting, a group of liberal activists were protesting inside with signs demanding the government shut down popular alternative websites like Breitbart and the Drudge Report.

[Greg Young is the nationally syndicated host of the radio show Chosen Generation]

[Commentary] Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s reliance on "real" economists in Econ Cloud Cuckoo Land (ECCL) to reverse Title II reclassification is going to get slammed in the courts big time. I would hope that real world common sense would prevail, and Pai would back away from his ill-considered proposal. But real world common sense is scoffed at in Econ Cloud Cuckoo Land.

As long as Pai continues to prefer Econ Cloud Cuckoo Land over the actual real world, we can expect him to continue to pursue policies that don’t work in the real world and don’t pass muster in court.

[Harold Feld is the senior vice president at Public Knowledge]

[Commentary] Despite Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s claim that he supports Network Neutrality, the proceeding he opened in May attacks not only the legal authority underpinning the rules — which is absolutely vital for enforcing them — but seeks to overturn these protections altogether. If Chairman Pai gets his way, Net Neutrality will be gone for good and people will be left with only the empty promises of big cable companies to protect them online.

This administration has gone after so many crucial consumer protections that we have fought for, from ending exploitative prison-phone rates to banning your internet service provider from selling your personal data. President Donald Trump isn’t working for anyone besides the corporate lobbyists and millionaires that are filling his administration. We’ve fought and won this battle before and we can do so again. But it’s going to take all of us working together. I will do my best working with my colleagues in the Senate to protect internet freedom, but we’ll need all of your voices engaged and ready to fight.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai and Sen Ron Johnson (R-WI) each called network neutrality a "slogan" that solves no real problems, with the senator also arguing that the Internet should have paid fast lanes. "It’s a great slogan," FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said, when asked by a radio host what net neutrality is. "But in reality what it involves is Internet regulation, and the basic question is, 'Do you want the government deciding how the Internet is run?'"

Chairman Pai, who is touring midwestern states to meet with rural Internet service providers about broadband deployment, appeared with Sen Johnson on WTMJ Radio in Milwaukee. "As chairman Pai said, net neutrality is a slogan," Sen Johnson said. "What you really want is an expansion of high-speed broadband, and in order to do that you have to create the incentives for those smaller ISPs to invest. They don’t really control their own fiber if the government tells them exactly how they’re going to use their investment." Because of net neutrality rules, "there’s less incentive to invest, so we’ll have less high-speed broadband," Sen Johnson said.

[Commentary] Since assuming leadership of the Federal Communications Commission earlier in 2017, Ajit Pai has been working to roll back the stifling Obama-era rules to return the power of the internet back to consumers and the public. This will benefit everybody, but this is particularly personal for millennials and young consumers who have grown up online and are driving much of the innovation that we see in Silicon Valley. Tumblr, Mashable and Snapchat are just a handful of the many tech companies that millennials have helped start that are changing the way we live. But if bureaucrats and special interest groups have their way, the government will control the internet and pick winners and losers.

Younger consumers want a better, faster, cheaper internet – and a one-size-fits-all regulation that reflects the world of the 1930s is not the answer.

[David Barnes is the policy director of Generation Opportunity.]