Edward Whitacre Jr. Quotes

The FCC has made it clear it would punish a cable or phone company for deviating from providing 'neutral' access.

I support greater access to the Internet, but going back to Obama-era regulations is not the answer.

Net neutrality isn't a government takeover of the Internet, as many of my Republican colleagues have alleged.

If I see anything remotely like a telcom-run faster internet that you have to pay more to get preferential traffic on, I'm out folks. I've seen this story before, I ran an ISP back in the late 90s.

To go back to a 1950s voice mentality with Title II and net neutrality would be a tremendous mistake for our country.

Any 'network neutrality' rule should be designed to forbid phone or cable companies from controlling the Internet.

The Internet belongs to all of us, not big telecom.

Net Neutrality is Internet freedom.

Obama routinely pushed policy that pleased the tech-savvy, including his successful effort to keep broadband suppliers from giving preferential treatment to bigger web companies over individuals.

We need to make Net Neutrality the law. We need to elect a Congress that will make it a priority to keep this important principal intact - and insure equal and open access to the Internet for all.

The question is not whether we want to keep this open, neutral Internet - we do, or should - but whether government rulemaking can give us the result we want.

Senator Wyden continues to be the Senate's truest champion of an open Internet.

Over the course of a year - from January 2014 to March 2015 - millions of Americans, hundreds of businesses, and dozens of policymakers weighed in at the Federal Communications Commission in favor of net neutrality.

I can say our strategy has always been and will continue to be getting our content in front of as many consumers around the globe as we can... AT&T has been an advocate of the tenets of no blocking, no discrimination, no paid prioritization.

Net neutrality is the principle forbidding huge telecommunications companies from treating users, websites, or apps differently - say, by letting some work better than others over their pipes.

The FCC sided with the public and adopted extremely strong net neutrality rules that should be a global model for Internet freedom.

I think it was a major mistake to revisit Title II.

You do not need the government to protect open internet; the marketplace was doing it and will continue to do it. All you are doing is adding a burden that does not need to be there.

The Open Internet principles were not legal rules adopted by the FCC; they were effectively a press statement posted on the FCC website.

A rule against paid fast lanes would encourage additional capacity; a rule permitting paid fast lanes would simply encourage cable companies to create congested slow lanes on the Internet so they could make money by selling fast lanes to big companies.

As each year and debate passes, more broadband companies will start to see that their future lies not in restricting an open Internet but in betting on it.

I support a free and open Internet.

We need a generation of net neutrality voters. People now really understand what's at stake, and we need to translate millions of comments to the FCC into millions of votes in the midterm.

Notably, the FCC fact sheet regarding the net neutrality plan does not mention any accommodations for small providers.

The United States needs modern, flexible, light-touch network regulation, not a one-size-fits-all utility model from the 1930s.