Tom Wheeler and his fellow Democrats approved the plan. FCC: Net neutrality with 'fast lane'

Passions about the future of the Internet were running high Thursday as the FCC approved Chairman Tom Wheeler’s controversial net neutrality proposal — with critics saying it could lead to a world of online haves and have-nots.

Net neutrality refers to the principle that Internet providers should not block or slow certain websites. But Wheeler’s proposal has sparked a firestorm for allowing providers like AT&T and Verizon to charge companies like Google and Facebook for faster delivery of their content. That has many asking if the final rule will actually amount to true net neutrality.


Wheeler started the meeting with a fiery speech defending his approach.

( Earlier on POLITICO: The rush to save the net neutrality plan)

“The potential for there to be some kind of a fast lane available to only a few has many people concerned,” Wheeler said. “Personally, I don’t like the idea that the Internet could be divided into haves and have nots, and I will work to see that that does not happen. In this item we specifically ask whether and how to prevent the kind of paid prioritization that could result in fast lanes.”

Protesters banged pots and waved signs outside the agency before the vote – and even attempted to crash the proceeding on a few occasions.

“The chairman spoke very eloquently about why the open Internet matters, but these are not rules that would accomplish this,” said Free Press CEO Craig Aaron. “There is a disconnect between what is said in his statement and what the effect would be.”

The vote, not surprisingly, fell along party lines, with Wheeler and fellow Democrats Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel approving the plan and Republicans Ajit Pai and Michael O’Rielly rejecting it. The action opens a four-month comment period for companies and members of the public to weigh in on the plan. After that, the FCC will write the final rule.

( Also on POLITICO: How Big Data spies on your kids)

In the weeks leading up to Thursday’s vote, public interest groups, Democratic lawmakers and the nation’s leading Internet companies slammed the fast lane concept, saying it would lead to inequity on the Web. Republicans and top telecom firms, meanwhile, warned Wheeler against one option he floats in the proposal — reclassifying broadband as a utility like telephone service, which they say would impose burdensome regulation.

Lawmakers have had lots to say in the days leading up to the vote, and they were quick to react Thursday.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said the “American people do not care what magic words the FCC uses to assert its authority” in a bid to keep the Web “free and open.” Rockefeller said he’s “glad that all options are on the table,” including the possibility that the FCC could treat broadband as a utility.

But Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) took a harsher view.

“The very essence of net neutrality is that a better idea or service should be allowed to succeed on its merits and not have to pay tolls to reach potential customers,” he said in a statement. “Rules allowing pay-to-play deals would also harm consumers, who could no longer be confident that the Internet speeds they pay for are sufficient to access the services they want.”

( Also on POLITICO: Big Data watches you, unchecked)

Speaking at the meeting, Rosenworcel said the process that led to the net neutrality vote was “flawed” and reiterated she would have preferred a delay. But she said Wheeler had made “significant adjustments” to his proposal which allowed her to support it.

O’Rielly said there was no need for a net neutrality plan at all.

“The premise for imposing net neutrality rules is fundamentally flawed and rests on a faulty foundation of make-believe statutory authority,” he said. “I have serious concerns that this ill-advised item will create damaging uncertainty and head the Commission down a slippery slope of regulation.”

This is the FCC’s latest effort to write open Internet rules. The commission’s two previous attempts were thrown out in court, and the issue has bedeviled previous FCC chairmen.

The idea of classifying broadband as a utility — known as the Title II in FCC jargon — has become a major flashpoint in the debate. Proponents say it’s the best option to ensure true net neutrality, but telecoms argue it would burden their business with cumbersome rules.

Verizon, which successfully challenged the FCC’s previous net neutrality order, said it’s reviewing Wheeler’s proposal but warned the agency against treating broadband like traditional phone service.

“For the FCC to impose 1930s utility regulation on the Internet would lead to years of legal and regulatory uncertainty and would jeopardize investment and innovation in broadband,” Randal Milch, the company’s executive vice president for public policy, said in a statement.

President Barack Obama, who nominated Wheeler, has remained on the sidelines of the debate, with the White House repeatedly pointing out that the FCC is an independent agency that makes its own decisions.

But press secretary Jay Carney did say Thursday that the White House plans to “carefully review” the plan.

“The President has made clear since he was a candidate that he strongly supports net neutrality and an open Internet,” Carney said in a statement, later adding that the White House was pleased that Wheeler “is keeping all options on the table.”

Obama expressed support for the concept of net neutrality during the 2008 election campaign, criticizing the idea that “gatekeepers” could someday “charge different rates to different websites.”

All the protesters started filtering out after the vote, some dejected — and the green patch where they had camped outside was nearly empty.

Columbia University professor Tim Wu, who coined the term net neutrality, carried some hope as he headed out of the meeting.

Wheeler “said he feels net neutrality in his bones,” he said, “so I hope he acts on that.”

Jessica Meyers and Tony Romm contributed to this report.