Here Come the Vague Big Government Net Neutrality Rules


The F.C.C. has released a 313-page document detailing the new Net Neutrality rules and it’s only the beginning. Once government rules are in place, they can be manipulated any way the government decides to manipulate them.

The New York Times reports that the commission  will get to decide what is acceptable on a per-case basis. The guidelines also include a subjective provision, requiring “just and reasonable” conduct, the Times reports.

The administration will pick winners and losers and they will decide that the “just and reasonable conduct”.

No room for corruption there!

The regulations also give the FCC new authority to police Internet privacy issues, issues that generally fall under the Federal Trade Commission.

In other words, the F.C.C. can do whatever they want and people would be hard-pressed to say it doesn’t meet the criteria.

The rules reclassify the Internet as a telecommunications service, subjecting providers to stricter government regulations to prevent a possible problem that has not occurred yet.

Under the guise of protecting the free Internet, the government will regulate and control it under very vague and subjective rules.

The alleged purpose of the rules is to impose rules over Internet service to prevent ISPs from blocking or throttling content or giving better access to content providers who will pay for speedier access to their clients.

The administration claimed they were concerned that some day ISPs would create Internet “fast lanes”.

These are rules created for a problem that doesn’t exist.


Marsha Blackburn (pictured above) has introduced legislation with 19 co-sponsors to limit the F.C.C.’s authority and rescind the new regulations.

“If there are net neutrality rules, it’s something to be done by Congress, not the FCC,” Blackburn told the Times on Thursday. “They’re on our turf, and we need to reclaim it.”

She said that the commission would still be picking out which companies would be exempt form certain rules. It’s no different than paying for prioritized traffic. What they’re doing is setting up a scheme to select winners and losers.

It’s also another executive power grab.