As Congress continues its efforts to reform our nation's telecommunication laws "net neutrality" the concept that consumers' and content providers lawful use of the Internet should not be limited or controlled by network owners will be one of the most debated aspects of proposed legislation. This debate will revolve around the two schools of thought on how best to insure Americans have continued full and unfettered access to the Internet.

The first such school of thought holds that existing laws and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) powers are adequate to deal with anti-competitive behavior. Proponents of this view, point out that expansion of networks by existing providers and the entrance of new providers could be hampered if network providers are restricted in how they manage their networks or are limited in their capacity to offer new service packages or formats. Furthermore, major Internet access providers have stated during Senate hearings that they are committed to upholding the FCC's four policy principles and the FCC does not believe does not believe it requires additional authority to police the Internet at this time. Proponents of this view note there have been no examples of widespread limiting or anticompetitive behavior that justifies the need to establish extensive regulation of the Internet.

The second school of thought pertaining to "net neutrality" maintains further regulation will be needed to prevent Internet providers from using their market power to the disadvantage of Internet users and competing providers. They believe the Internet could develop into a two-tiered system favoring large, established companies or those with ties to broadband network providers. They maintain that today's market is dominated the telephone and cable television companies, and a strong third player is needed to provide true environment of competition. Proponents of this school of thought believe given these factors a national policy is needed to clarify expectations and ensure the "openness" of the Internet and the adoption of a single, coherent, regulatory framework to prevent discrimination is required to provide the stability needed to encourage investment and foster the growth of new services and applications.

It is clear that both sides of this debate desire to insure the Internet continues to expand and equal access to all. As this debate continues I encourage New Mexicans to take a look at the Communications Act of 2006 (S. 2686)