I support net neutality in full...

To the list of bullet points, I'd add: "Employ Web 3.0 policy-enabled technologies" since this will make it possible to extend Internet technologies, and the productivity advances these enable, to confidential information (e.g., in health care). For this innovation to occur, an environment of trust must exist and users must be able to control who can and cannot see their personal information.

Freedom, innovation, and opportunity are all important aspects of the Internet today. It is important that we act now to pass Net Neutrality legislation, and preserve the freedom of the Internet. These three values, freedom, innovation, opportunity, are at the foundation of American ideology. They are the core of what we, as Americans, believe in, and taking them away would be a travesty.

kinda off topic, but how exactly does this get approved, its obviously number one, do we get any feed back?

How else can I keep up with the most current research in the science areas related to the brain disease afflicting my family? Access to science keeps hope alive.

How else can I keep up with the most current research in the science areas related to the brain disease afflicting my family? Access to science keeps hope alive.

The accessiblity and freedom of this tool is what has helped us and others thrive.

The Internet is already widely accessible and will expand further as both technology and funding increases. As our economy moves quickly into a depression it may be that most people will find it hard to pay for Internet service, especially broadband and Internet usage will drop. It won't be politics or technology that will restrict Internet usage, but the ability of the people to pay for it.

You want to give the uninformed non-internet people a voice? I would love that they learned something but we see lots of those red states happlessly mirroring stupid ideas, yet I believe we can teach poeple something eventually or perhaps enable sane people to deprogram all the silly god based education not founded on earth. Here on earth, man is better suited than god as this was made for us.

Marianlibrarians comment is easily the most important here to me.

ISPs can provide service any way they want, provided it is made plainly known in contract. They can even charge more for traffic that leaves their own domain (location based prioritization) so long as it's contractually clear. If video gets throttled and people want video, someone will provide it. Will it cost more? Sure. Is that because it is more expensive to deliver video? Of course.

I urge you all to be careful about this issue. I believe network neutrality is important. First of all, how is "ensure internet widely available" any better than all the other entitlement nonsense we see all around us?? Secondly, I propose that yes, the network be neutral, but that we leave ISPs alone. This will in some cases require separating the interests of ISP/network conglomerates.

The big media companies should have no greater say, control or rights over the publishing of creative content on the internet than the homegrown producer or small business. The internet represents an ideal open platform where content can be judged based solely on its own quality. New Media Creators must not be subjected to censorship, throttling or carrier charges in order to reach their audience.

90% of everything is Congress but it doesn't stop the President from introducing. I never understood why people think the President is the one with real power Congress Makes laws, President enforces. Still, a CTO would be a good move. The USG needs to be more flexible in this realm. We rely too much on industry.

Clinton had been putting much of this in place through Digital Divide and NASA Education Outreach (addressing technical issues like the librarian above). Bush gutted this and put us in 8 years of the technology Dark Ages. Bring back and expand one-stop, transparent government.

There's another meaning for the word "accessibility" -- ICT should be accessible to people with disabilities. This facet of ICT policy is just as important as any other inclusive approach -- there are 30 million Americans who have difficulty using one or more forms of ICT.

Wow... I mean, there is a place for legislating this stuff, but come on.. two wars... failing economy... I'd be a lot more worried about losing my job and place of residence than worry about what the fucking CTO is going to do, the president has much more power to veto bills and push them through congress then any CTO will.

Using the analog television spectrum and existing analog spectrum infrastructure per ScooperJay's suggestion below is much more important than an earlier transition to IPv6.

I think that IPv6 is necessarily rolled into the idea of universal connectivity, so I don't understand why it is a separate proposal on this site.
Above it was suggested that there was a choice between internet and food. While it is true that connectivity is not a substitute for food, it is a growth enabler in the same way that the alphabet and language are, and we should fund it accordingly.

This appears to be in Obama's plan already: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/#open-internet