I wrote Tillis a response back using the help from some people in my /r/technology thread
This was my response to Tillis' obvious canned answer:
The Honorable Senator Tillis,
In your recent letter to me explaining why you do not support Net Neutrality, you stated, “As you may know, the FCC recently voted in secret to adopt net neutrality mandates and reclassify broadband Internet access services as ‘telecommunication services’ under Title II of the Communications Act. This would allow the government to regulate the Internet under the same rules designed for "Ma Bell" in 1934, which hampered innovation and growth for more than fifty years.”
However here are the actual facts regarding innovation and growth following the break up of Bell Systems:
From 1934 until the break up of Bell Systems, "Ma Bell", their employees discovered or invented:
• the electronic speech synthesizer
• electron diffraction (which earned them a Nobel Prize in physics), and laid the foundation for solid state electronics
• the photovoltaic cell
• the transistor, which is the basis of virtually every electronic device you use today (and earned them a Nobel Prize in physics)
• error correcting codes and information theory, which are keys to most communication and data storage in use today
• modern cryptography
• the modern solar cell
• the laser
• the cosmic microwave background radiation (which earned them a Nobel Prize in physics)
• the Unix operating system (almost all internet infrastructure uses Unix or Unix-like systems)
• the charge coupled device (CCD), which is the key technology that enabled digital photography (and earned them a Nobel Prize). The CCD is still used for professional, medical, and scientific imaging where the highest quality is required.
• laser cooling and atom trapping (which earned a Nobel Prize in physics).
It's hard to think of another company that even comes close to the innovation that came out of "Ma Bell" from 1934 to 1984, in either breadth, depth, or quantity. They were regarded universally as the equal of any top research university, and had no trouble attracting top scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. IBM Research is probably the only contender, but they were not as wide ranging.
When "Ma Bell" was broken up in the early '80s the pieces remained regulated under Title II, and their successor companies are still regulated under Title II. Some of the Title II rules may have been relaxed, but the fundamental Title II rules remained in place.
As such, I feel that you have not adequately answered my question as to why you are opposed to Net Neutrality. I feel like you gave me a standard canned answer that is given to everyone who inquires about Net Neutrality. I want to know why you are opposed to Net Neutrality.