Congresswoman Judy Biggert was another representative that I contacted to determine her stance on Network Neutrality. Unfortunately, like most Republicans, she does not support Network Neutrality. Here's her (faulty) reasoning:
For instance, the Markey Amendment could prevent network operators from giving priority to Internet traffic from a patient's heart monitor over traffic delivering a music download. It also could prevent network operators from charging higher prices for those requiring premium services, like greater reliability. By comparison, it costs significantly more to send a letter by Express Mail than it does to send it First Class, but no one argues that the U.S. Postal Service is "discriminating" against First Class mailers or treating them "unfairly." If anything, those paying more for Express Mail are actually helping to keep the cost of mailing a letter First Class
What a heaping pile of dung. She almost makes it sound like taxing "faster" lanes on the internet will help us all (who the hell uses internet-based heart monitors that require a latency less than a few microseconds?). I also hate it when people try to relate moving physical goods in the real world to transferring network traffic over the internet. The two have absolutely NOTHING in common.
The telecoms are really fighting against Network Neutrality; they say that it's necessary to cover the costs of building out their networks. More crap!
The industry has already had subsidies and tax breaks, enacted during the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which garnered them billions of dollars that they have pocketed in the form of profits and which never got used for the original purpose of the legislation: building out their network. Now they are asking for more money - would anyone care to guess where you think all of their additional profit will end up?