cable TV so they can bundle and rip you off. The writing is all over the white board as to what is going on.

wonder WTF, how could have this have happened.

Thus the crashing of the FCC site last week. What we have most to fear is that our government won't listen to us, because they're in bed with the cable and telecom companies.

what we the people want. We must get the obscene money out of politics if this democracy is to survive into the future.

but you must add Netflix, Hulu Plus, and Amazon Instant Video before I would sing up for sure. We already pay close to 199 for internet and cable now.

Or perhaps, you'll get a $20 reduction on cable as an "incentive" to add Internet service.

Generally, I find evidence-based argument preferable.

Look at what the cable companies currently do, and how they force feed and package the choices we (dont have).

Also, remember the arguments in the 1990's about removing restrictions on financial sector. people who raised warnings were also told there was no "evidence" that the Big Banks and Wall Sr. investment houses planned to take over the economy. and wreck it....We had to wait until the "evidence" was in.

Why justify condoning totally avoidable and predictable disasters by claiming you need "evidence" of future behavior?

Look at the cable companies -- like Comcast/Time Warner -- and how they treat cable service, and that's a pretty good indication of what they will do when given the permission to.

where they then charge advertisers a premium for "access" to you, including unblockable browser ads, pop-ups, and spam spam spam.

The cable companies are one reason there a so many damn commercials on cable TV. An every other commercial is a damn advertisement for Time Warner Cable. So you get to pay for the privilege of allowing them to advertise to you.

Except cell phone carriers have been reducing their prices to compete against one another, the cat is already out of the bag for ISP's they can't charge you more for services they are already offering because you will leave and find an ISP who won't. What they will do is offer better services than you have now for for an additional fee.

And all of the companies who are against the ISP's and for net neutrality are fighting against adopting better compression technology because they feel it's too expensive. They would rather ISP's cover the burden of them sending you crappy MPEG-2 video streams and if you are lucky h.264 video streams. HEVC is here so Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, Youtube and any other VOD provider should be adopting not fighting. Europe and Asia are adopting why is America fighting so hard?

The Internet and access to receiving and sending information on it should be totally neutral.

That doesn't mean ISP's can't make a healthy profit. But they shouldn't be allowed to get greedy and start doing what they already do with their cable operations, and create "haves" and "can't afford" classes of consumers, and different classes of content providers (thus encourging the process of the Wal Marting of the Internet).

It should be heavily regulated as a public utility. And if the "pipes" need upgrading, then they should be publicly funded or subsidized with strings attached to ensure universal access, if that's what's necessary for improvements.

As for the content providers, well that's up to them if they want to improve their service or not. We should not allow the ISP's to get a stranglehold to determine which one gets preferential treatment.