Pros And Cons Of Pro-Government Intervention

Cody Arnold

Government Interference With ISP’s Broadband access is becoming a necessity in modern America. For most Americans the internet is a part of our everyday lives. Whether it be for school, work, or social interaction, we rely on broadband access to get us through the day. Since we rely on the internet so heavily should it be regulated by the government? Should the government interfere with the open market and create regulations with regards to access and usage? There are negatives and positives to both sides. These questions create an ethical dilemma that separates people into pro-government intervention and anti-government intervention. In this paper I will discuss what would be involved with government intervention. Then

The main concept is that the federal government would step in and now regulate the internet like a utility. There are a lot of things that come hand in hand with this. First, how would this effect access? Although it is a topic of debate, the general consensus is that the government would not supply a whole new infrastructure; meaning that the federal government wouldn’t be laying high speed fiber optic cables in every town all over the world. However some argue that this is actually what is needed, not regulation over current internet service providers (Crawford 2014). The big feature of government interaction would be net neutrality. Net neutrality in its simplest definition states that internet service providers and the government should treat all information on the internet equally. There should be no discrimination on any level or aspect across the web. This also means that internet service providers should not be able to charge different prices for any unjust discriminatory reason. This is where the government would focus their efforts and reclassify the internet as a utility. What this means is that the internet service providers

One of the biggest reasons people are against internet as a utility is due to the reclassification that would take place. If the government gets involved in any sort of regulatory action over the internet it would mean that the internet, as mentioned earlier, would have to be reclassified under Title II regulations of the Telecommunications act. This could be very bad news for a couple of reasons. There is fear that the reorientation would create many strict rules and regulations that limit investment in new and existing infrastructure and new services. Title II imposes a whole new set of rules and regulations on Internet access services. Following those new rules inevitably will cost ISPs more money — money that could be used to improve infrastructure (The Top Five Ways Title II Hurts Consumers 2015). Plus, with Title II comes an enormous amount of industry uncertainty. If regulations make an ISP’s investments riskier or less profitable, it’s far less likely to invest. The result will be fewer network advancements, fewer infrastructure improvements, and fewer new products (The Top Five Ways Title II Hurts Consumers 2015). And if Title II creates a threat to infrastructure investment by established ISPs, the threat to potential new ISPs is even greater. Murky, unclear regulatory environments are the bane of the investor. If the goal is more broadband