Polls

Where do you stand on the FCC’s net neutrality repeal?

Sponsored by:

If You Enjoy Polls Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
75 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
SARGE
SARGE
6 years ago

Is that the best you can do??

Judy Smith
Judy Smith
6 years ago

I appreciate your explanation on the homepage here. I’m still not sure that I understand it fully, so I hope I voted the right way.

Mel
Mel
6 years ago

As with most things, the govt names something the OPPOSITE of what it actually is…..like ‘state department’ has nothing to do with states. So, if the govt is naming something ‘neutrality’ you can count on it—it’s anything but neutral. Like ‘equality’, only some are more ‘equal’ than others! Let the free market decide winners and losers…government get outta the way!

Dr Kevin Sabourin PhD
Dr Kevin Sabourin PhD
6 years ago

Like the unaffordable healthcare act; Dems are geniuses when it comes to deceptive practices. Net neutrality had nothing to do with anything but government regulation, again and again. Communists calling themselves Socialists. How about Americans, period!

Army Vet 1971
Army Vet 1971
6 years ago

We have in our neighborhood an online “Neighborhood Post” that includes more than 1800 homes. Postings are usually about the neighborhood watch, for sale items, free items and recommendations for local services like appliance repair, car mechanics, etc. A recent post was actually a rant about net neutrality using talking points from CNN and late night “leftist” talk show hosts. The individual lectured about how we should “educate ourselves”
about how the “big corporations” were planning to slow down the internet. He went on and on. I was intrigued by his use of a red flag hammer and sickle icon on the post. I responded by advising that he research the issue using
sources that provide more than leftist talk points and pointed out that it was the Obama Admin that coined the “Net Neutrality” phrase in 2015. I also stated that he planned to treat the internet as a public utility. In other words, make the internet a government controlled entity. I used the “Affordable Care Act” as an example of what happens when a corrupt government takes over a public entity. Obama lied blatantly about the ACA. Do I want the government taking over control of the internet? No. The thought of that administration being able to control the flow of information scared me. I suggested the writer educate himself by studying what has happened to once
wealthy and prosperous Venezuela when the government began taking over private industry. I also suggested he study the origin of the Nazi regime. I was surprised by the number of millennials who jumped in to call me
misinformed and uneducated. When the “Net Neutrality” act failed, the Wall Street Journal published an article stating basically the same thing I had said, except much longer and in depth. I posted that article and requested
that the CNN crowd EDUCATE themselves and read the other point of view. I didn’t receive any more hate mail. I am amazed at the lack of civility and downright hostility of the left.

Kot
Kot
6 years ago

Gry Government of our life and and we will raje care of ourself

Mrs.+Robyn
Mrs.+Robyn
6 years ago

Re: Net Neutrality, the O’Bama Admin came up with it, so it was a bad idea

Bill
Bill
6 years ago

Anything that contradicts what president muslim did is good!

FREDDA KLOCK
FREDDA KLOCK
6 years ago

MEL SAID IT WELL – THE GOVERNMENT USES EUPHEMISMS TO CONFUSE AND CONFLATE – NEUTRALITY WAS NOT NEUTRAL.

Daniel Mikulsky
Daniel Mikulsky
6 years ago

The Internet has been a ranging success due to minimal government oversight. Eventually care facilities will be rare, and care will be moved to the home, with monitoring done via the internet. Keeping the net neutral will inhibit innovation in the area of personal care for seniors.

William
William
6 years ago

It’s more government over reach.

Dave
Dave
6 years ago

Net Neutrality is the newspeak term to describe large content providers (Netflix, Google, etc.)—who soak up broadband—using government to constrain those companies that provide the infrastructure of the internet super highway. In plain English, Net Neutrality is just another synonym for corporate cronyism.

Dan W.
Dan W.
6 years ago

I must admit that any discussion of net neutrality makes my eyes gloss over but I can’t help but think that somewhere down the road, some company will be sending out an invoice with my name on it.

Jack
Jack
6 years ago

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.'” – Ronald Reagan …. all you need to know….

Mike Hyneman
Mike Hyneman
6 years ago

Net Neutrality was pushed through by Leftists led by O’SODSKI. It lead to filtered searches and preferred results. Standard web searches were answered with LEFTIST leaning results as being painted as mainstream. Even without the tentacles of Net Neutrality citizens are required to initiate exhaustive digging in order to uncover the truth being hidden under piles of Leftist propaganda.

Aardvark
Aardvark
6 years ago

“Net Neutrality” was enacted in the last year of the Obama administration, yet the left tries to make us believe that the internet will just fall apart if it’s repealed. Here is a little known fact the FAKE NEWS won’t tell you: Net Neutrality regulation was written by GOOGLE! Still think it was for the little guys?

Robert
Robert
6 years ago

I claimed unsure. I used to be computer ignorant, but I’ve acceded to computer indifferent. I have no knowledge of what “net neutrality” means, or covers, but it sounds like another case of the government weaseling into things that don’t concern them, instead of working on the things that do.

R4strings
R4strings
6 years ago

Even the name “net neutrality” was designed to sound like a good thing for the sheeple. Don’t fall for it. Educate yourself. https://youtu.be/21cxhIPQL28

Martin+Steed
Martin+Steed
6 years ago

As with most things, this was a no-brainer. Essentially, ANY regulation imposed by the Obama Administration was designed to hurt the country, and therefor would hurt the people. Obama did not and does not like the United States of America and appointed like-minded people to positions of power. They set out to “fundamentally transform” the country; he said so, but people didn’t know what he meant by that. Thank God we did not elect Hillary or that “transformation” would have been completed.

Joe
Joe
6 years ago

I’m pretty sure most of the good folks voting on this have no idea on this subject. They are just voting the point of deregulation or against an Obama regulation. The internet has changed a whole lot since 2015. There is more and more streaming going on. Whoever controls the flow of your internet service will have more control on what content you get to see. Just my thoughts. I voted I don’t know on this one. I guess we’ll see.

George J
George J
6 years ago

It’s pretty simple anything Obama was for I’m automatically against ! He’s for a BIG Socialist Govt ! It was a terrible 8 years but this Great Country made it thru and now getting rid of all his non sense ! Hats off to the Trumpster !!

Papa Doug
Papa Doug
6 years ago

If you read news reports of Net Neutrality it’s easy to see why so many are confused. Net Neutrality as proponents use it is a paradox, an oxymoron that implies one thing while doing another. Obama once said it would be like a public utility, a heavily regulated entity that would stifle the Internet and allow the government to decide what you should read or see and what you should not. Net Neutrality is like the First Amendment, it may not be perfect and some misuse it but without it we would become like the former USSR.
Listen, we already had a an open Internet so why would leftists want to give us what we already had? Net Neutrality is about regulation and restriction and needs to be repealed!

Lois Keel
Lois Keel
6 years ago

I voted and then wondered if I accidentally voted for the repeal. The actions of big carriers like Verizon attempting to go against it, while it was still in effect, shows the regulation of what should be a public utility is needed. As a 1-person business using the internet for research and publishing I’m very concerned. As someone who also subs in a nearby library, I know how crucial internet access is to so many unable to pay for “fast lanes” or unlimited access.

Ivan Berry
Ivan Berry
6 years ago

Has anyone else experienced their Replies being deleted?

Dave Wooldridge
Dave Wooldridge
6 years ago

ANY time the Feds say’ it’s for your own good,’ Red Flags the size of Rhode Island go up!

Tom Lavin
Tom Lavin
6 years ago

Although the name “Net Nuetrality” sounds like we would want to support a non-partisan internet, the name was a trick which would invite way too much government interference in our free communications and that at our own expense.

Judy Smith
Judy Smith
6 years ago

Okay, so just as I figured, it was Obama’s idea or the idea of one of his cronies. Therefore, it could be valuable only as something meant to destroy free communication rather than to further it. I know the odds of Trump’s being in his prime after more than eight years are slim to none, but I truly am relieved to see him putting things into place to keep on moving us back in the right direction. How long does anyone think it will take us to get out of the mess created between 1/20/09 and 1/20/17?

Bill Carithers
Bill Carithers
6 years ago

I’m dont fully understand the difference but since Obama never wanted anything that allowed the American people to excerxise our demands for freedom of expression I voted against the net neutralityplan becaue Obama was for it !

Donald Mccormick
Donald Mccormick
6 years ago

I was UNSURE because they used the SAME identifying head of the bill that our EX-LIAR-in-CHIEF used to get HIS agenda passed into law and I do NOT know which regulation people was talking about the NEW net neutrality or the old net neutrality regulation.
All I want is an internet that I can USE with the same cost as any other internet user and the SAME speed as those others.

The SPAMS and SCAMS could be punished without even asking for additional regulations because the existing LAWS could let use to SUE them for their actions the same as if they TRIED to regulate them out of existence.

D.R.Alarcon
D.R.Alarcon
6 years ago

Regulation by the U.S. govmnt. once meant safeguarding people from unfair& illegal market manipulation by business. Today it is business that uses govmnt. to make laws that obstructs competition and make politicians wealthy at our expense. Have a look at your phone bill sometime especially if you pay your own way in life.

StudioJoe
StudioJoe
6 years ago

Well, poll results show very few understand net neutrality. The ISP’s (which are monopolies in most US markets) will now give the “fast lane” to big corporations that will pay big $$$ to crush startups and competition, including politically “incorrect” free speech they don’t approve of. The yahoos whooping it up for the death of net neutrality apparently don’t grasp that a government agency killed it. “Let the market decide…” What b.s.

When natural gas was “deregulated” in my area and stopped being treated as a public utility, the same morons were out there with their pom-pom’s saying “this is a win-win for consumers and the free market & competition will drive prices down!” Natural gas bills are now around 400% higher than they were 10 years ago.

T. R. Buttner
T. R. Buttner
6 years ago

I’m against any gubmint regulation of free speech, no matter where or how…

George Proctor
George Proctor
6 years ago

99% of all the actions of the Obama administration was another step toward total government control. The end result, socialism by a million laws.

Richard
Richard
6 years ago

What about the property rights of the companies who create internet infrastructure? (Ex: many miles of fiber-optic lines, routers, switches etc.) Why does the government have the right to mandate how a company uses its own property? (Exceptions for pollution etc. are understood.)

Jim in Oregon
Jim in Oregon
6 years ago

Mel, you are right. I’m still not sure I understand this topic. My opinion is for the net to remain open to all users equally. And government should get out of the picture. The net is not a public utility. I believe this was foisted upon us by the prior administration to get more control our lives. A pox upon all that participated in this scheme to defraud American citizens. Let the markets decide. And until the courts get back under the Constitution, keep you’re hands off!!!!

Gary Maue
Gary Maue
6 years ago

1234

Duke
Duke
6 years ago

It’s evidently not a problem for people to pay more for Netflix, Hulu, Roko etc. or else they were misinformed about what was repealed. Big win for cable companies

Old+Griz
Old+Griz
6 years ago

“Throttling” of speed and access to not only the internet, but to cellular services is alive and well and prevalent by IP and Cellular providers! Hell, C_x Communications advertises higher speed and wider broad-band with their most expensive packages! And, if you by a cheaper package from a secondary Cell or IP provider, they are “renting” unused ban-width from one of the big dogs and the big dogs make no secret that THEIR primary customers receive primary service. So, as the system, (cell or Internet) systems loads increase, guess who’s services slow down and start dropping connections!!!!
This is not hear say, but first hand experience with C_x and A__T!

will
will
6 years ago

govt motto ” if it ain’t broke don’t worry we’ll keep fixing it till it is”

Wayne
Wayne
6 years ago

I do not believe the question was clear in what it was asking

Norman Lawrence
Norman Lawrence
6 years ago

I too was suspicious of the “neutrality” label tacked onto the bill. When any media becomes over regulated, the possibility for corruption creeps in. When choices are eliminated the world as a whole suffers. “One size fits all.” has been proven to NOT work. I think I am better able to determine what I want to seek out information for, or what email that I want to read that pops up in my inbox. Some things are relevant to me, others are not.. Knowing that Washington D.C. double speak is so pervasive, I try to find out exactly what a proposed piece of legislation will actually NOT do. If you have watched any of the floor debates in Congress or the Senate, depending on which side proffers the legislation, it is either the best thing since sliced bread or the worst thing to ever come down the pike. “Nuf said”

Larry
Larry
6 years ago

In general, regulation forces an unnatural equilibrium so should be used as a last resort. But more importantly…

Pay attention to who wants “Net Neutrality”. The biggest group of supporters is Big Tech (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc) and following along in the footsteps of Big Pharma, Big Food, and the FDA, Big Tech wants to control the Internet and what better way than to “write” the regulations for the FCC. The Internet has a distributed architecture and no good ever comes from incestuous relationships.

Left alone “water will seek its own level” and we have other ways to limit monopolistic behavior regardless of industry.

JudySmith
JudySmith
6 years ago

Thanks everyone. Now I see clearly through the murky water. Net neutrality is, just as I suspected, totally biased and not neutral at all. Net neutrality leads totally away in the other direction and right into net BRUtality.

E rittenour
E rittenour
6 years ago

Amen to army vet 1971. I want the govt. to stop regulating the American people, I wish politicians would protect our freedoms like our brave young men and women in arms. Govt. stay out of our personal lives and our wallets!

Erc
Erc
6 years ago

Net neutrality was a bunch of crap. Just another liberal way to stifle the American people!

Al Nalley
Al Nalley
6 years ago

The silence from our conservatives is deafening. America didn’t elect conservatives for the ride-a-long program. Washington was never a careers program! Mr. President clean the swamp. Washington is out of touch with America. If you don’t know it by now, your problem is left over liberals and stiff necked conservatives still controlling departments. They are your leaks. As you knock off the rats the mice will follow.

RICHARD D SANDERS
RICHARD D SANDERS
6 years ago

Th “Benevolent” Big Brother Government needs to keep their slimey mitts off internet content.

Mary
Mary
6 years ago

Net Neutrality is censorship of conservative thought. If progressive/liberal radio stations can’t find an audience, then they should fail and not be propped up by the gov’t purely for equal air time. I remember AIr America, with one host AL Franken, I could barely keep my hand from turning the dial, but I made myself listen for a full 20 minutes, 20 years Iater, I still consider it 20 minutes of penance.

Jaydubyah
Jaydubyah
6 years ago

Net neutrality only was supposed to mean that ISP could not regulate the data that was presented through their domains so that big corporations didn’t control the flow of data. Instead, the regulations provided for big internet corporations to gain total control over their portion of the business – thus google made itself into the king of the search engines and abuses its power by forcing the data that goes through them to conform to what ever the government of the country insisted upon. Facebook did the same thing as did other large news feeds – they stifled the free flow of data under their control. The new rules or the relaxation of the older rules, merely relieves the large corporations who run the ISPs of the stifling regulation that forced them to provide the same pricing or at least no advantageous pricing to larger users having little or nothing to do with free flow of data or net neutrality, and more to do with guaranteeing that little companies could compete immediately with larger ones. None of this has anything to do with net neutrality and more to do with guaranteeing that ISPs can make a profit and that small users are not priced out of markets by predatory pricing which regulations remain from those originally made. The affect on net neutrality was zero. It is possible that lower bandwidth needs would be on slower networks to be priced lower. None of those requirements were changed. The original big blow over net neutrality was about the fact that the FCC decided that it had authority to regulate the internet which should have been of more concern to those who value net neutrality. The Congress has that control and did not cede it to the FCC. But since the Congress did nothing about it, until they do, the FCC has filled the void and now has screwed us all.

Rich
Rich
6 years ago

There is Data (what is sent and received) and there is Bandwidth (how fast it is sent and received), all data should be equal, but one should pay for the bandwidth you use

75
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x