EDITORIAL - The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste is speaking out against the “Net Neutrality” initiative being debated this week in our nation's capital, a piece of legislation that the group says stifles competition and adds unnecessary government bureaucracy.

“Anytime Congress attempts to ‘protect’ anything, it usually means more regulation, less competition, less consumer choice, and higher costs,” said Tom Schatz, CAGW's president, adding that the high-speed Internet market needs to remain competitive without government interference.

Net Neutrality is a concept that regulates the kinds of equipment that can be used on the Internet by residential customers and tries to protect against the degradation of Internet service and the control of Internet services by ISP's, or Internet Service Providers. Critics fear that Net Neutrality legislation is highly vulnerable to unnecessarily-tight regulations that may discourage technological advancement, while proponents maintain that it is integral to the continuance of a free and open Internet.

CAGW argues that Internet Service Providers freely undertake “self-governing” measures that have been adopted by the Federal Communications Commission that keeps government out of this issue and allows Internet technology to advance and improve. The group says that H.R. 5353, the bill currently under debate in the House of Representatives that implements a form of Net Neutrality, “would impede the evolution of the Internet and the innovation it encourages.”

Web sites like SaveTheInternet.com take a noticeably different position, arguing the lack of such restrictions on telecommunication companies may result in discriminatory Internet service. Speaking about Google, they write “Another search engine could pay dominant Internet providers like AT&T to guarantee another search engine opens faster than Google on your computer.” They also fear that political action groups could pay telecommunication companies to intentionally slow down access to competition web sites, or prioritize network traffic to their own web services.

Many proponents of Net Neutrality point to AT&T's terms of service document, which states in no uncertain terms that your Internet service can get disconnected without notice if the user engages in activity that “tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries.” Proponents view this as clear censorship of free expression on the Internet and hold up Net Neutrality as one mechanism to combat it.

Even Hollywood is weighing in on this particular issue. Some music and film production studios are concerned that the Net Neutrality movement may prevent telecommunications companies from fighting video and music piracy, a crime that can cost companies millions of dollars in lost revenue. Piracy is when users share music CDs, DVD movies or software with other users across the Internet, generally for no fees. This results in thousands of Internet users getting access to entertainment material and computer software without any payment to retailers or Hollywood studios.

“Today, new tools are emerging that allow us to work with Internet service providers to prevent this illegal activity,” said Dan Glickman, head of the Motion Picture Association of America. Glickman argues that telecommunications companies need the power and flexibility to monitor and prevent this type of activity.