The affordable healthcare act like every other thing helps some while hindering others(this was going to happen one way or the other)
The main ones who are against
Are the same ones in a position to ensure it wont work..
They are mostly also the ones that are every man for himself(some oddly who basically had enough for insurance but would rather refuse to pay medical bills instead)

But in the current economy its probably not best due to the fact you need a job. But at the same time best time because its already down..

But the fcc part-they been had control the net neutrality was created in 2011 i recall the internet working just fine in 2010

But heres the thing lately businesses have been powerhungry gimme gimme lately(just look at apple and att)

The FCC has for the most part been the only department who hasnt went powercrazy.

I doubt they will start trying to take control of it but merely make sure big wireless companies dont take over it.

We will tax your freedom 

I was referring to political-friendliness as measured by degrees of net neutrality rather than degrees of information freedom, so I'm not sure that any available case studies apply ( or exist? ). A mesh network would be a reasonable topological response to a lack of neutrality, but not to an intolerance of information freedom. 

Thank you for the support +Brian McGonagill!

Oh there'll hear all right 

My letter:

I am an extremely worried and concerned citizen.

Let me be clear, I'm not merely a worried European citizen, I'm also an expert in Computer Science, Computer Security, Software Development and the Internet.

Initially, I was very pleased and extremely proud that my European Commission was about to declare to the world that it recognizes how the Internet and the "open access" that it enabled, has been the greatest source for the recent boost in economy and innovation by drafting regimentation which sought to protect just that and ensure its citizens are in the future guaranteed the power to continue to innovate both economically, and socially.

Then I learned that large companies with vested interests sought to bend the rules and cripple the Internet for all citizens if it meant they could gain a new way of making money.  Sadly, I see members are being swayed by their arguments.  I see members are convinced by promises of new "innovation" granted to the powerful telecommunication companies and how this will spark new markets, but sadly forgetting or ignoring that in doing so, it will rob the Internet of what has made it so hugely beneficial to is all in the past.  Rob everybody else of opportunities to innovate and make new markets.

Never mind that these proposals will make it more difficult for minority groups to oppose groups backed by strong financials.  It will make grant telecommunication companies the power to put volume controls on websites and silence the masses in the interest of the few.

The Internet has caused a huge explosion and ripple across the entire economy, not because it connected computers world-wide (that existed already), but because it introduced a new communication method to everybody; not any media, but one that is entirely open, free (as in freedom) and completely fair.  It caused a huge revolution because it was different than existing media models, where centralized companies controlled through capitalistic processes which information was more important than others.  The Internet didn't differentiate; and as a result, the differentiation was a result of popularity to the population.  Big companies such as IBM were suddenly competing with tiny two-man companies such as Google.  Innovation won, not money.  And the world is better of because of it.

That is why we need to make sure that the small get the same chances as the huge to innovate.  The big are no smarter than the small, usually the opposite is true: the small are not constrained by bureaucracy and more.  They are the ones you should be asking for new ideas.

I beg you, evaluate CA 11, and all other legislation that the commission asks your opinion on, by considering whether the miracle of Google can repeat itself or be encouraged by this legislation, or whether it hampers small players in favour of the large vested interests.