Obama’s Net Neutrality regulations, came into effect in 2015 to restrict internet service providers from limiting bandwidth to particular sites. The regulation, which Heritage and Heritage Action have stood against for a long time, officially ended on Monday. Now, the FCC has replaced Net Neutrality with the Restoring Internet Freedom Order, which the Federal Communications Commission claims will decrease red tape and increase freedom and free market principles on the Internet.
Earlier this year, Heritage’s Senior Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy, James L. Gattuso criticized Obama in an op-Ed published in The OC Register for making consumer prices more likely to rise. Because the regulations weren’t enforced fairly by the FCC, it made it more difficult for companies to pay for their costs and “left the consumer to carry the load,” said Gattuso.
In another report published on Heritage’s website, Gattuso outlined his critiques of Net Neutrality at greater length, suggesting that the Internet is like any other market, and would enjoy better price competition, freedom of access, and innovation without the Net Neutrality restrictions on internet traffic.
Heritage’s partner organization Heritage Action for America also put pressure on Congress by key voting against Net Neutrality this month. This key vote is an influential means for Heritage Action to impact the votes of members of Congress and the Senate: a Congressman’s vote on an issue that Heritage Action has key voted will impact that congressman’s score on Heritage Action’s influential scorecard, which uses congressmen’s voting history to tell constituents how conservative their representatives are.
Moving forward, Heritage has high hopes for the future of the Internet, and assured supporters of net neutrality in a Daily Signal article that the Internet will still exist despite the ending of the regulation.
Do you believe that the government should regulate internet use? If so, to what extent?