Earl Comstock should know better than most people that regulation of the incumbents does not produce viable or rational results. As the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. One need only look at the history of telecommunications regulation since 1996 (and really since 1956) to see what I mean. If the concern is that the Bell Companies will charge a premium for premium delivery of content, the solution lies not in Washington, but in the peering arrangements that support the Internet. If peering arrangements between backbone providers honored quality of service markings then Internet peers could compete for premium delivery of service. This sort of structural, market place remedy is far more effective than regulation and is crucial to sustaining competition in the Internet backbone market. If QoS markings are honored through the peering arrangement, then the Bell Companies dominance in the broadband access market is of less concern because content providers could still reach the Bell's consumers on a premium basis without being held hostage to the Bell Company's demands. That is the consensus that will stimulate investment in the nation's telecommunications infrastructure.