By way of “Net Neutrality,” the federal government is preparing to do to the Internet what it has done to the auto industry, public schools, the tax code, the home mortgage industry, the postal service, the healthcare industry, the ethanol industry, the airline industry, freedom of political speech and the financial industry bailout.

One might expect that the Obama Administration’s recent intrusions into those industries would keep it sufficiently busy, at least temporarily.  Still ravenous despite those gigantic undertakings, however, it now seeks to regulate the Internet as well. 

Until now, the Internet has vividly illustrated how American innovation and technology flourish precisely when government keeps out. 

After all, what other institution or industry can match the Internet’s success and positive societal impact in recent decades?  Certainly no industry into which government has inserted itself. 

A well-functioning Internet, however, is of secondary concern to the Obama Administration and the Net Neutrality special interest army salivating at the prospect of regulating it.  Indeed, the fact that the Internet demonstrates how industry can flourish without suffocating government regulation probably makes it an even more critical target to those special interests. 

For those unfamiliar with the term, “Net Neutrality” refers to the dangerous movement to have government dictate Internet providers’ business models, and the manner by which they can transmit data.  Network owners, who have invested enormous resources into establishing infrastructure, would be forced to treat all Internet sites and applications the same, regardless of the capacity that they consume.  For example, providers would be forced to treat larger sites, whose video and data transmissions create bottlenecks, the exact same way that they treat smaller mom-and-pop sites. 

To analogize, Net Neutrality is like telling a railroad that it cannot treat a customer moving twenty railcars of freight any differently than it treats a customer moving one crate of goods. 

Net Neutrality tends to benefit wealthy titans like Google and MoveOn.org, who therefore favor it out of pure self-interest.  As a result, they are working frantically with bureaucrats to confuse the public and implement this dangerous scheme. 

It’s a prototypical example of big business and big government in bed together.  Haven’t we had enough of this already? 

Advocates of Net Neutrality reach new depths in shamelessness by telling the public that it will somehow protect “equal access” and “the public interest,” as if giants like Google and MoveOn.org are somehow incapable of protecting their interests without the specter of government force behind them.  They further contend that Internet providers will otherwise block certain websites, ignoring the fact that consumers in a competitive market would move to another provider if that occurred. 

Now, their destructive goal is closer to becoming a reality.  President Obama’s infamous “stimulus” package includes a $7.2 billion grant to expand broadband service to rural areas.  But as they say, the devil is in the details.  The legislation’s provisions require carriers accepting government dollars to adhere to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Net Neutrality guidelines that are currently under legal challenge.  Most troubling, however, is the fact that the bill empowers the FCC and National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to devise even more Net Neutrality rules for any Internet provider that accepts funds. 

Unfortunately for consumers, Net Neutrality, if fully implemented according to proponents’ desires, will diminish the incentive to extend America’s broadband infrastructure, because providers will be unable to manage traffic flow more efficiently, or engage in necessary price and service differentiation.  It will also expand the size, scope and authority of government by necessitating new regulatory commissions and all-powerful bureaucrats.  Furthermore, network providers would be less able to distinguish themselves through differing service options, and trial lawyers would naturally discover an all-new litigation treasure trove. 

If you’re content to watch the federal government spoil the Internet in the same way that it has maimed public schools, the home mortgage industry, the tax code, the postal system, the auto industry and the airline industry, then sit back and do nothing. 

But if you prefer to save the Internet from the harm inflicted upon those industries, then take a brief moment to contact your Senators and Representative to tell them to spare the Internet that ruinous fate.