The topic of Net neutrality is a sensitive one. The forces on either side of the mightily contentious divide have long been wielding their torches and various sharp-edged gardening devices.

Unfortunately, the advocates of an equality-driven, unbiased platform upon which various networks (the Verizons, the Comcasts, etc.) would continue to build, compete, and serve their users, have taken a significant beating in recent months. There have been several points at which federal and state representatives have been convinced by the corporations of the need to erect a system by which operators would be allowed to offer preferential treatment for data transmission. The telecommunications providers’ official reasoning: the continuation of Net neutrality would eventually cause digital gridlock. (Also, there’s been the mention of a desire for increased profits.)

Even as recent as yesterday, word from one of the largest of American ISPs, Comcast, was presented in defense of Internet filtration. The company has essentially stated its devotion to filters and other measures to ensure things go swimmingly upon its network.

Well, shortly following Comcast’s open pledge to remain a bugger of a control freak, US House representative Ed Markey, along with Chip Pickering, officially introduced “bipartisan legislation to help preserve Internet freedom and explicitly make “Net neutrality” a guiding principle of U.S. broadband policy.” (Google later delivered its admiration for the Markey-Pickering proposal in its Public Policy Blog. The Mountain View giant is all about keeping the Web open and uber-competitive. That is, after all, the basis upon which it went from plain Google to Big Google.)

I must say, it is about time that a legislator on Capitol Hill introduced a sensible policy proposal on the matter of Net neutrality. After all, a level playing field is what the free market is purportedly intent on keeping in place. How the non-neutral argument given by a number of ISPs went as far as it did is really very puzzling and disconcerting. And I do very much hope a reversal of the present trend occurs reasonably soon.

It is of course necessary to keep in mind that this newly introduced legislation is only being championed by very small number of individuals. Ed Markey and Chip Pickering do not constitute a supreme influence. So whether Congress on the whole will be convinced to side with the pro-neutrality tribe in this case is something to ponder at great length.

But perhaps this move to raise the red flag will act as a catalyst to break the thick cloud of gloom that hovers over Silicon Valley - and even the nation in general. We’re well overdue for a bill that would greatly fortify the interests of the public, as well as innovators all around the technology industry. Though it is much too early to say definitively how the winds will blow now, I have to tell you, my mood got a little boost of happy upon hearing this news. How ‘bout you?