Brian Schatz Quotes

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.

Political divisions may be fierce, but there is at least one issue that most Americans agree on: net neutrality.

As president of Common Cause, I joined a coalition of groups ranging from the Christian Coalition to Consumers Union, and we went to Congress with over a million signatures asking that Net Neutrality be made law.

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.

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

It's an incredibly important thing to make sure we preserve net neutrality.

Net neutrality was essential for our economy; it was essential to preserve freedom and openness, both for economic reasons and free speech reasons, and the government had a role in ensuring that Internet freedom was protected.

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.

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

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.

Net neutrality is the right thing for our democracy, economy, and global competitiveness. And Americans support an open Internet.

I support a free and open Internet.

Beginning in the Clinton administration, there was, for nearly two decades, a broad bipartisan consensus that the best Internet policy was light-touch regulation - rules that promoted competition and kept the Internet 'unfettered by federal or state regulation.' Under this policy, a free and open Internet flourished.

Net neutrality is one where we the people are definitely on the ropes.

The most important thing for people to understand is that the basic rule that people have a right to send information over the Internet - even when they are using a wireless device - is part of the framework.

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

If net neutrality goes away, it will fundamentally change everything about the Internet.

We support an open Internet and having rules - the right kind of rules that are legally enforceable and allow for investment and innovation.

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

I have worked on open Internet, speech, and entrepreneurship issues for years.

Even though the Internet touches every part of our lives, one person is to blame for potentially destroying its potential for innovation and freedom of expression: former FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.

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.

Internet users should be able to choose where to go online and which applications to use. Comcast, say, shouldn't be allowed to block Skype just because it could siphon the communications giant's telephone business.

The most important thing to remember here is that the Internet is not broken, and all of the innovation that we've seen since inception has been based on it being free and open.