Below the fold is the letter I just sent to both my senators and the representative for my district.
Dear ADRESSEE,
Given the ongoing debate over "net neutrality" a set of circumstances that I recently encountered may be of interest.
I recently asked Qwest if it were possible to get a higher bandwidth on my residential DSL. One of the drivers for this request was finally having had enough of Comcast (my local cable provider) regularly facing me with the choice between higher prices or arbitrary cuts in the channels available to me. If Qwest could provide what I wished I would have had no hesitation about replacing that service with Qwests partner, DirectTV. Instead of replacing one service with a competitor as the free market should dictate, I find that my household is faced with a distasteful choice between two monopolies, forced to simply choose which one will swindle me least.
For the last decade I have been a customer of a local internet company, Vector Internet Services (visi.com) - They distinguish themselves by exemplary customer service and technical knowledge. Qwest either cannot or will not provide specific services that I require from my internet provider, Vector not only can but enthusiastically will. However, when requesting a bandwidth increase Qwest informs me they "can't" provide that speed to Vector. I iinvestigate further and discover, as I suspected, that this is neither a technical limitation nor a policy decision by Vector but instead a choice by Qwest to deny high speeds to any of their customers that do not use them or their preferred partner (Microsoft) as the customers ISP.
So, in order to escape the cable monopoly, I have to accept a telecommunications monopoly forcing my custom to another convicted monopolist. Those results are bad enough for my family and I, but there is a further consequence. This is having the effect of forcing a respected local ISP, that retains their customers through exemplary service, out of the residential market.
I appreciate that Qwest's conduct is not in any way illegal under current law, but perhaps the consequences of that conduct would argue for strong net neutrality legislation or in the alternative a reclassification of "internet access" as a utility that is subject to all regulations that apply to telephone service. This is particularly true considering that I'd be paying Qwest exactly the same amount whether I used their "partner" ISP or the one that actually supports my setup and provides the product I wish to use. One has to wonder about the possibility of kickbacks between this pair of monopolies since there has to be something to make Qwest prefer one source of the same revenue over another.
PERSONAL DETAILS REDACTED
((letter addressed to: Senator Franken, Senator Klobuchar, Representative McCollum)