Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Tapping the common sense on net neutrality

This article is part of a series that reveals the many policy proposals on which Republican and Democratic voters agree.

Kull is Program Director of the Program for Public Consultation.

Lewitus is a Research Analyst at Voice of the People whose research interests focus on policy, public opinion and democracy reform.


Thomas is Vice President of Voice of the People and Director of Voice of the People Action. Thomas is an organizer and government relations professional with years of experience working in campaigns, advocacy, and policy research.

The Federal government has failed to address many issues facing our nation, largely due to increasing partisan polarization that results in near-constant gridlock. Some speculate this polarization is a reflection of the American public. However, Voice of the People has found that majorities of Republicans and Democrats actually agree on numerous positions–over 200 as of now. These surveys, conducted mostly by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland, differ from standard polls in that they provide respondents with background information and pro-con arguments, before they give their recommendations.

Net neutrality is about to once again become a major topic as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seeks to reinstate it. The implications are significant, as net neutrality regulations place major restrictions on Internet Service Providers (ISPs), prohibiting them from: creating internet “fast lanes” for users that pay more; providing faster speeds to the ISP’s own applications; or blocking or slowing down specific websites or applications. These rules were instituted by the FCC during the Obama administration, and then repealed by the FCC under the Trump administration. Now that the Biden administration has appointed pro-net neutrality officials to the FCC, they are proposing to reinstate those rules.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The policy debate over net neutrality is quite technical for the average citizen, but it touches on common value debates that every person can weigh in on such as the role of free markets, and the extent of government regulation in ensuring equal treatment. By providing people with the information necessary to understand the issue, as is done in public consultation surveys, the public can effectively apply their values to make a policy recommendation.

In 2022, after net neutrality rules had been repealed, a PPC survey provided respondents with a briefing on the issue and had respondents evaluate arguments for and against reinstating net neutrality regulations. A large, bipartisan majority (73%) supported reinstating them, including 82% of Democrats, 65% of Republicans, and 68% of Independents.

Without the background, standard polling has also found majority support for net neutrality, including a majority or plurality of Republicans, but with large numbers saying they don’t know or have no opinion. A Morning Consult/Politico poll in 2022 found 55% support, with just 16% opposed and a large 29% saying they don’t know or have no opinion. Among Democrats, 57% were in support and 15% opposed; and among Republicans, 49% were in support and 20% opposed. Earlier polls from 2021 (Ipsos), 2017 (Morning Consult, Ipsos) and 2018 (Morning Consult) also found bipartisan majority support.

In the 2022 PPC survey the arguments in favor of net neutrality were found much more convincing than the arguments against it, though the arguments were reviewed by both proponents and opponents.

The first argument in favor of reinstating net neutrality, from the 2022 survey, stated that since net neutrality’s repeal, ISPs have taken advantage of consumers by slowing down internet speeds and requiring higher fees to reinstate them; thus net neutrality rules are needed to rein in such harmful behavior. That argument was found convincing by a bipartisan eight-in-ten (Republicans 74%, Democrats 86%).

The first con argument asserted that net neutrality regulations can stifle innovation, impede the development of internet infrastructure, and result in slower download speeds. Just four-in-ten found this convincing, including 46% of Republicans and 31% of Democrats

The second con argument proclaimed that concerns about the repeal of net neutrality have been overblown, because the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is required to publicly report anti-competitive behaviors of ISPs. Just half found this convincing, although a majority of Republicans did (57%).

The second pro argument countered that disclosure of anti-competitive behavior is not enough, since the FTC has no power to actually police the major ISPs, which dominate the market and provide consumers with little to no choice. A bipartisan two-thirds found this convincing, including 74% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans.

A list of over 200 policy positions with bipartisan public support can be found on Voice of the People’s Common Ground of the American People website.

Read More

The Fragile Ceasefire in Gaza

A view of destruction as Palestinians, who returned to the city following the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, struggle to survive among ruins of destroyed buildings during cold weather in Jabalia, Gaza on January 23, 2025.

Getty Images / Anadolu

The Fragile Ceasefire in Gaza

Ceasefire agreements are like modern constitutions. They are fragile, loaded with idealistic promises, and too easily ignored. Both are also crucial to the realization of long-term regional peace. Indeed, ceasefires prevent the violence that is frequently the fuel for instability, while constitutions provide the structure and the guardrails that are equally vital to regional harmony.

More than ever, we need both right now in the Middle East.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money Makes the World Go Round Roundtable

The Committee on House Administration meets on the 15th anniversary of the SCOTUS decision on Citizens United v. FEC.

Medill News Service / Samanta Habashy

Money Makes the World Go Round Roundtable

WASHINGTON – On the 15th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and one day after President Trump’s inauguration, House Democrats made one thing certain: money determines politics, not the other way around.

“One of the terrible things about Citizens United is people feel that they're powerless, that they have no hope,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Ma.).

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Independents as peacemakers

Group of people waving small American flags at sunset.

Getty Images//Simpleimages

Independents as peacemakers

In the years ahead, independents, as candidates and as citizens, should emerge as peacemakers. Even with a new administration in Washington, independents must work on a long-term strategy for themselves and for the country.

The peacemaker model stands in stark contrast to what might be called the marriage counselor model. Independent voters, on the marriage counselor model, could elect independent candidates for office or convince elected politicians to become independents in order to secure the leverage needed to force the parties to compromise with each other. On this model, independents, say six in the Senate, would be like marriage counselors because their chief function would be to put pressure on both parties to make deals, especially when it comes to major policy bills that require 60 votes in the Senate.

Keep ReadingShow less