Imagine you're a voter searching the Internet for information about an upcoming election. You go to the candidates' websites, but the videos of their speeches and debates won't load. You log on to an advocacy site that had an interesting blog and other interactive tools to help you learn about the candidates and issues last year -- but now it doesn't work properly either. You search for the day's campaign news, but your Internet service provider seems to be steering you to download episodes of Commander in Chief and buy a DVD of The American President.
Far-fetched? Maybe a little. But make no mistake: The telephone and cable companies would like to transform our Internet from a medium that allows people to connect to one another, engage in debate and learn about the world into little more than a portal to sell goods and transmit television programs, films and games.
There's a dangerous bill called the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act (COPE) making its way through the House that could be voted on as early as Wednesday. COPE would make it impossible for certain protections governing Internet freedom to be written into rule or law, leaving all of us vulnerable to companies that would like to ''own'' the Internet and mine it for profit. The only communications likely to be ''promoted'' and ''enhanced'' will be those of the country's largest phone and cable companies.
The telecom giants are going before Congress right now and asking for the right to violate what's known in the tech community as ''net neutrality.'' Net neutrality is the principle that you should be able to access whatever web content or services you choose, without any interference from your Internet service provider. Companies such as Verizon and Comcast have already announced plans to create a two-tiered Internet, where some websites and services would travel in the ''fast lane'' -- for a fee, of course -- and the rest of the Web would be relegated to the ``slow lane.''
A two-tiered Internet would put small businesses, nonprofits, entrepreneurs, political candidates and local governments at a significant disadvantage and stifle the innovation that has brought us Google, eBay, the blogosphere, instant messaging and so much more. Failure to preserve net neutrality now would open the door to allowing Internet service providers to discriminate against websites and services that can't or won't pay for access to the ''fast lane.'' If network providers are allowed to control the flow of information, the open and freewheeling nature of the Internet could be lost.
Why is Common Cause so concerned about a telecommunications bill? COPE threatens the potential of the Internet to spur citizen engagement in their democracy. We know how democratic discourse has benefited from this technological marvel. In 2004, according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, 63 million Americans went online for political news. An estimated seven million individuals asked for e-mail updates from candidates, and four million donated money online to parties and campaigns. That involvement is only growing.
Millions of citizens access information from advocacy websites ranging from Amnesty International to the National Rifle Association. And e-activists are transforming the way citizens communicate with their elected officials and have their opinions heard on the most pressing issues of the day.
But this renaissance will be cut short if access to the Internet is determined by corporations more interested in selling goods and entertainment than in encouraging democratic discourse. So far, this is a message that our elected officials have not heard. Indeed, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., one of the bill's sponsors, predicted that COPE would win next week in the House by a majority of 280 or 290 votes.
If that prediction comes true, our democracy will be the poorer for it.
Chellie Pingree is president and CEO of Common Cause.
© 2006 Knight-Ridder
###
