that's 2018 house and senate contributions. Look at the 2016 presidential contributions.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.php?id=D000067823&cycle=2016
Hillary got $1.6 million. Trump got $21,000.
Look at who the employees donated to..
https://www.wired.com/2016/08/techies-donate-clinton-droves-trump-not-much/
Even if this was reversed... my point is the same. Do you want a company with so much control having so much political influence? The reason most of this country believes Net Neutrality is something they want is because of Google's political influence to protect themselves from getting charged for it's extreme YouTube bandwidth.
I prefer choices and competition. Whenever single entities get too big and too powerful then the little people (us) lose our power. We can't vote with our dollars and time when there's only one product. I don't mind big companies, I just prefer there to be more than one so they compete for our attention.
Maybe they were looking to get their way through the left side, all the polls thought she was gonna win. Maybe your right, it would not benefit anyone but big money ISP to end net neutrality and it would definitely cause less people to watch youtube if ISP charged you extra to stream youtube or charged youtube which may result in more ads, slower speeds loading videos or a monthly payment from it's users to offset the costs.
Without net neutrality, ISP can demand money from any web service and slow them down to any speed they want if they don't pay. Or just slow them down and not even ask for money. If a ISP did not like Fox news, they could slow its site down for it's users to a unusable level. They could turn your internet into something that resembles China.
I don't like lobbying or campaign contributions. There should be a limit to campaign contr and no lobbying. Maybe 5,000 per person and no contributions from companies.
As far as employees, that is their choice. Just like NRA employees or big oil employees.
Wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
"
Net neutrality is the principle that
Internet service providers treat all data on the
Internet equally, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication.
[4] For instance, under these principles, internet service providers are unable to intentionally block, slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content. This is sometimes enforced through government mandate. These regulations can be referred to as "common carrier" regulations.
[5] This does not block all abilities that Internet service providers have to impact their customer's services. Opt-in/opt-out services exist on the end user side, and filtering can be done on a local basis, as in the filtration of sensitive material for minors.
[6] Net neutrality regulations exist only to protect against misuse.
[5]"
"A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider
Comcast's secret slowing (
"throttling") of uploads from
peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets.
[11] Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like
BitTorrent, until the
Federal Communications Commission ordered them to stop.
[12] In another minor example, the Madison River Communications company was fined US$15,000 by the FCC, in 2004, for restricting their customers' access to
Vonage, which was rivaling their own services.
[13] AT&T was also caught limiting access to
FaceTime, so only those users who paid for AT&T's new shared data plans could access the application.
[14] In July 2017, Verizon Wireless was accused of throttling after users noticed that videos played on
Netflix and
YouTube were slower than usual, though Verizon commented that it was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".
[15] A September 2018 report from Northeastern University and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst found that U.S. telecom companies are indeed slowing internet traffic to and from those two sites in particular along with other popular apps.
[16]"
P.S. If you think google is biased don't use it. I don't go to Fox or Msnbc because I think they are biased. Companies have been taking political stances for a while. Chick fil a said they didn't like gay people. Nike endorsed Kap. The Home Depo cofounder spoke out against dems. The list goes on and on. If half the country stopped using google it would take away a lot of their power.
