Comedian John Oliver recently described net neutrality as the single most important issue that is too boring for anyone to care about.

Of course, Oliver has already proven those words to be false. Within 24 hours of his June 1 HBO rant against big telecom companies — whom he compared to drug cartels — the Internet trolls he incited had produced so much traffic on the Federal Communications Commission's website that they crashed the comments section.

People aren't disinterested in net neutrality as much as they are perplexed by it, but those who follow the issue closely tend to be a passionate, politically progressive lot. They see the need for a level broadband playing field for all Internet content providers the same way the Occupy Wall Street movement saw the need for income equality.

Net neutrality crusaders are focusing their energy these days on the idea that the FCC should reclassify broadband providers as utilities, so the FCC can have the authority to enforce net-neutrality regulations.

That's why these advocates were outraged last month when 20 Democratic U.S. representatives — including San Antonio's Joaquin Castro — signed a letter to FCC Chairman Thomas Wheeler, urging him to reject reclassification.

That May 14 letter made the case for the telecom corporations as effectively as any lobbyist ever could, by arguing that an environment free of regulation has benefited both providers and consumers.

“We are concerned that opening the door to subjecting broadband service to a wide array of regulatory burdens and restrictions, including (reclassification), might halt this progress,” the letter stated.

In response to the congressional letter, various progressive websites — such as Democratic Underground, CREDO Action, and Down with Tyranny — accused Castro and the other signers of selling out the American public's interests in favor of Verizon, AT&T and Comcast.

I called Castro on Friday to get a better understanding of his position on net neutrality, and was surprised to learn that the freshman congressman had asked to have his name removed from the letter, only five days after it was sent to Wheeler.

Castro said a miscommunication occurred between his staff and the office of U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Texas. As a result, Castro's name was placed on the letter without his consent.

In a May 19 letter to Green, Castro wrote: “In the review process of this (May 14) letter, my staff contacted your office to add my name as a cosigner. Unfortunately, there was miscommunication. While I respect the statements in the letter, I hereby rescind my name from this letter and positions stated within it.”

Net neutrality concerns have intensified since a Jan. 14 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the Verizon vs. FCC case. The court ruled that the FCC does not have the authority to bar broadband companies from slowing or blocking public access to content providers that refuse to pay fees.

The FCC could only gain that authority by reclassifying broadband companies as utilities, and the commission is currently soliciting public comment on that issue. Meanwhile, the major telecom companies have responded by stepping up their attacks against reclassification.

In a June 6 blog post, AT&T executive Jim Cicconi wrote that reclassification of broadband companies “will have a massive negative impact on American broadband deployment for years to come” and will “risk massive collateral damage to many, if not most, U.S. Internet companies.”

Internet access hasn't been a big issue for Castro during his first term in Congress, and while he says he fundamentally supports the concept of net neutrality, he's still examining the nuances of the issue, and considering how best to achieve a one-tiered access system without excessive regulation of the industry.

“The reason I pulled my name off (the letter) is because I think it's fair to wait for a public comment period,” Castro said. “And I generally favor broadening access to the Internet.”