If the neutr-elites were truly honest and their real NN concern was market power and not reasserting government control over communications companies, they would have inserted a sunset trigger provision in either the Markey or Snowe-Dorgan NN bills, which then would have ended NN when “sufficient” competition emerged. Unfortunately both bills have no sunset, obviously envisioning net neutrality as a permanent policy that would never change no matter how many competitive alternatives consumers eventually enjoy. I believe this is because the core neutr-elites of Moveon.org, the Democratic “netroots” are virulently anti-business, and pro BIG government command and control.
These BIG Government neutr-elites, also share an eerie resemblance to the elitist-hubris of the Gore-Hundt FCC, which we have all suffered through before. Remember, it was the Gore-Hundt FCC that rolled back cable rates 17% and postponed needed capital investment. It was the Gore-Hundt FCC that thought their mandate was to reallocate market share and wealth to new competitors through skewed rules that ultimately led to the CLEC and Fiber market bubbles and cost American investors and pensioners over one trillion dollars in losses. It was the Gore-Hundt FCC that single handedly declared an AT&T-SBC merger was “unthinkable.” It was the Gore-Hundt FCC that gave us the UNE-P managed telecom competition policy that was designed to reallocate market share and telecom wealth. (UNE-P was essentially a made-up policy that the Supreme Court ultimately and effectively ruled illegal).
Why do I bring this up now? The NN debate has made it increasingly clear to me that we have seen this elitist-hubris before.
Is it just coincidence that Google suddenly “got religion” on the need for Big government control of the Internet, during the period that former Vice President Al Gore, self-proclaimed inventor of the Internet" has been Google’s “Senior Advisor”?
By the way, the Google relationship has reportedly made the former Vice President very rich man.
