I didn't think as clearly as you. My thought was for congress to reduce their funding 10% until they shelve this idea.
But seriously, if the internet has been able to police itself up until now without the FCC, does even the broadcasting world really need them? Could their function not be performed by some non-government foundation made up by the broadcasters themselves?
Good point. They were once considered indispensable when the then finite radio spectrum (followed by television) needed some ground rules and a referee. In fact, at least part of this controversy is probably mission creep by an archaic agency looking to maintain relevance in modern times.
The original reason for the FCC was to solve the problem of signal interference in broadcast stations. This was a “technical” issue, RF interference, not about content.
That was before PC (Political Correctness).
Much of their time was spent in technical issues and a lot of that connected to and about Military use of the spectrum and circuit design of the time. These techies, were/are/will remain pro-Military, anti-Commie and pro-Private Industry. I was close to many such techs and have the greatest respect for them. Those who worked in the “labs”, for Defense contractors and for the Military.
The POLs at the top in the FCC are like all bureaucrat, only trying to maintain their position and power. Hence suck-ups to the top elected officials. Now those “top elected officials” are the enemy of the nation.
Yes. Their are plenty of professional organizations such as the IEEE who already have standards to make sure that computers can talk via Ethernet (IEEE 802.3), WiFi (IEEE 802.11) and countless others that are universally accepted world wide. No reason a organization could not come up with technical standards ensure the internet functions while not caring about the content.