I didn’t know much about the Net Neutrality debate, but now that I have an idea, I have mixed thoughts about it. Looking at these rules from both aspects of the equation, it kind of takes away our rights. To make something a law, means you must follow it, or suffer the consequences. Broadband internet service was called a utility in the news article. For the most part you have one company for each utility.  Con-Edison is for electricity. National Grid is for gas. Although there is not one single internet provider, these new rules take away competition between providers. Once competition is taken away, it generally becomes a monopoly. On the consumer’s point of view, they are thrilled with the new rules because it lets them be “free”. However, like the article mentions, eventually the prices will go up if service is increasing and more efficient. Once the prices go up, consumers will not really have a choice. Realistically, not everyone can afford the same grand service. Some people are tight with money and choose to have a slower service… as long as they have some type of service.  Tom Wheeler called the internet the “core of free expression and democratic principles”. Is he right? Does this rule change that? It’s still a little shady to me. The internet is free expression; however the price charged is not free.  The rules seem more on the republican side than democratic. Will this change how consumers use the internet?