Jim - Your comment on broadband availability overlooks a significant portion of the US - namely, rural America. Certainly, major metropolitan areas have a good selection of broadband providers. This is not true for most rural areas, where the selection is frequently limited to either the incumbent telco, or the cable company, and frequently not both. Wireless providers, including 802.11, EVDO/EDGE/etc and even pre 802.16 WIMAX providers, have serious limitations: line of sight and terrain, particularly in the Western States and the Appalacians, prevent wireless deployments. The real story is that for nearly all of rural America, broadband availability is extremely limited and there is little to no competition here. Nor is there ANY incentive on the part of the telcos or the cable companies to serve rural areas. Nothing in any of the legislation currently under consideration changes this, and I believe this is a much bigger problem than "net neutrality". As a network engineer, I view with high amounts of scepticism the plans of the telcos to discriminate traffic across their large backbones. It has been conclusively shown for many years now that a "dumb" network at high speeds is much more effective, efficient and reliable than a "smart" network which attempts to prioritize packets based on content.