Free-Market Advocates Challenge Martin in Net Neutrality Debate

FCC Chairman Martin, known for advocating light regulation and pro-big-business policies, continues to draw flack from network providers and conservative think tanks for resurrecting the net neutrality debate. As they have before, they contend there is no need for regulation — they say the market will determine innovation, which regulation would stifle. And so, again, they have let loose with research and opinions.

For example, FreedomWorks, a policy group chaired by former U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey, insists there is no evidence of network favoritism. The Phoenix Center reiterates its stand that net neutrality would not result in lower prices for consumers. And the Competitive Enterprise Institute think tank even went so far as to advise the FCC to drop the matter entirely.

That’s because regulating the Internet means speeds would be frozen at today’s levels, says Wayne Crews, vice president for policy and director of technology studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. As bandwidth consumption grows thanks to ever-evolving applications, networks will need to increase speeds. But under net neutrality regulations, that couldn’t happen due to bureaucratic red tape, he says. This “will ultimately hurt content companies too,” Crews says.

All of this comes after the Federal Trade Commission dismissed in a recent report the need for net neutrality regulation. Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras said in a June statement that policymakers “should be particularly hesitant to enact new regulation in this area,” citing the absence of significant market failure or demonstrated consumer harm.

To read more about the net neutrality debate and how it has evolved into a wireless-oriented argument, read “Net Neutrality Debate Takes a Wireless Turn” from the September issue of xchange.

Share this article: Email, Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Yahoo!MyWeb, Windows Live Favorites, Furl
Add this article feed to: RSS, My Yahoo, Newsgator, Bloglines