Letters to the Editor

Net neutrality is not enough

What does net neutrality mean for people in rural Pennsylvania? Bob Potter (1/29) and Patty Satalia (2/2) are missing a critical point. I support net neutrality and oppose allowing service providers to charge on a site-by-site basis. But what good is net neutrality for families who can’t afford to pay up to $50 a month for a high-speed connection?

Potter and Satalia say that my opponent, a teacher of Information Technology, “gets” the internet. My problem with his position is that he relies on an outmoded legal structure to fix the access problem. The FCC was established in 1934 to help develop and manage the emerging communications technologies: radio and TV. Those out-of-date laws are still being used to regulate cable, the internet, and cellphones. My opponent thinks antitrust laws will somehow fill the gap, but antitrust laws predate the FCC, are even more out-of-date, and were never designed for telecommunications.

Instead, we need comprehensive congressional reform of U.S. telecommunications law to ensure low-cost, high-speed internet access for all Americans and to address internet safety and security. We need to protect our data and systems from foreign adversaries and criminals, and we need to get serious about keeping internet pornography away from children. We need a representative in Congress who “gets” that the internet needs to be safe, secure, and affordable, as well as accessible to all.

Kerith Strano Taylor, Brookville

The writer is a Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress

in Pennsylvania’s Fifth

Congressional District

  Comments