Whatever your views of net neutrality, the attempt by the civil government to treat the internet as a “public utility” may not be as innocent as you (may) think.

See, Obama and other bureaucrats say they want the internet treated as a public utility so that the FCC can ensure net neutrality. But the net neutrality claims may just be a trojan horse for a more sinister objective—tax revenues:

The agency [FCC] would like to make Internet service a public utility, placing broadband under Title II regulation of the Communications Act of 1934. This move would make broadband subject to New Deal-era regulation, and have significant consequences for U.S. taxpayers.

Under this decision to reclassify broadband, Americans would face a host of new state and local taxes and fees that apply to public utilities. These new levies, according to the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), would total $15 billion annually. On average, consumers would pay an additional $67 for landline broadband, and $72 for mobile broadband each year, according to PPI’s calculations, with charges varying from state to state.

I tire of this. Net neutrality can be enforced effectively only by consumers! If the civil government further regulates the internet, it will result ultimately in a loss of net neutrality … duh. Because the civil government, just as it has done in every other area, would legislate and regulate according to its own purposes and interests.

Further, the main reason net neutrality is even being challenged is because of civil government intrusions. The revolving door between the FCC and Comcast, for instance, should be enough to give anyone pause. In other words, the challenge to net neutrality comes from government regulation, and I fail to see how more extensive government regulation would help anything.

Seriously, people. Are we so blind? Are we so trusting? Are we so stupid? Wait. Don’t answer those questions. It’s depressing.