The truth about an Open Internet

An Open Internet – the idea that some of the largest Internet service providers (“ISPs”) should not have gatekeeper control over how Internet traffic is treated – continues its fierce debate in Washington, DC.  It is important to note, however, that reasonable Open Internet policies are something that both Republicans and Democrats can, and should, support: no blocking, no paid prioritization, no throttling, and increased transparency.  In fact, Open Internet principles were first adopted under Republican FCC Chairman Michael Powell and first enforced under Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.  Now, these principles are embodied in recent draft legislation from my Republican colleagues in the House and Senate. 

For Republicans, an Open Internet embodies the same principles as free trade policy:  no barriers to entry and no tariffs to distort markets; and no preferential treatment that protects inefficient markets.  An Open Internet represents a free market and competition.  For Democrats, an Open Internet provides maximum consumer benefits and equality of opportunity.  All of these ideals represent the best of both parties and core American values.  More importantly, an Open Internet is the most pro-growth and pro-innovation agenda that benefits the entire country.

{mosads}Although the Open Internet debate can seem highly technical and complex, it is at its core a rather simple proposition.  According to FCC Chairman Wheeler’s statement in Wired on February 4, the proposed Open Internet order would establish a light-touch framework, based on the successful wireless model, made possible by the 1996 Telecommunications Act.  I emphasize 1996 because it wasn’t 1934 legislation.  It was bipartisan legislation passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Clinton.  It laid out the rules that reflect modern, competitive policies, not ancient monopoly-based rules that some large ISPs are wringing their hands over.  As reported, the FCC’s draft order prohibits ISPs providing Internet access from interfering with the information and content their customers send and receive through blocking, slowing down, or extorting additional fees from content providers. It does not rate regulate or raise taxes.  Such an Open Internet policy will maintain an Internet that encourages innovation and competition, and a level competitive playing field for small businesses and new market entrants.

However, a select few of the largest companies providing internet access are fighting this light touch approach, perpetuating falsehoods intended to scare free market proponents into opposing it. They have alleged that light-touch Open Internet policies are anti-free market.  In doing so, they fail to acknowledge that a free market is not one in which a select few “too big to fail” service providers dictate terms to consumers, business, and content providers. Rather, a functioning, free market is a place where incumbents and new entrants, big businesses and start-ups, are able to aggressively compete for customers.  Where competition drives innovation, investment, new ideas, better products and lower prices.

If a select few of the largest ISPs are allowed to have unfettered control over what their customers access over the Internet, they could decide what type of content is sent to their customers and which videos download the fastest. They will give themselves insurmountable advantages over everyone else, including small businesses. They will extract tolls for access and essentially pick winners and losers giving consumers and businesses little say in the matter.  

Such control of access to the Internet, without any basic, enforceable rules to check bad behavior, could be destructive to the marketplace of ideas and economic growth that an Open Internet supports. Allowing a select few “too big to fail” companies to dictate what customers can purchase, use, and watch is setting this marketplace of ideas on a path to failure.  And nothing, I mean nothing, is more destructive to free, functioning markets than the government having to intervene and try to fix a market after it has failed.  That is what should concern any policymaker in this debate. 

The Open Internet is a great engine of entrepreneurship and innovation.  Policymakers should protect this and maintain the core American, free market values: entrepreneurship, innovation, equal opportunity, and competition. 

Pickering served in the House from 1997 to 2008. He is the CEO of COMPTEL, the country’s longest standing association advocating for competitive market-based technology and telecommunications policy. COMPTEL represents leading Internet, business, international, wireless, and fiber companies and over 150 small and mid-sized business broadband competitors across the country.