The Bells' primary argument in favor of deregulation is that they should be regulated at parity with the cable companies whose broadband services are deregulated. This argument is a red herring because these companies are regulated similarly today. The cable companies' primary business is providing video programming service to consumers, and under the must-carry rules, they must carry the television signals of their competitors, the broadcasters. Similarly, the Bells' primary business is to provide telecom services to consumers, and under the Telecom Act, they must open their networks to their competitors, the CLECs. Thus, both the cable companies and the Bells must make access to their facilities available to competitors, and neither the cable companies nor the Bells provide high-speed Internet service on a regulated basis.
Parity exists today.
This is not competition as envisioned by the Telecom Act, and it is not the competition envisioned by consumers across America. Rewarding the Bells now while they continue to block competition would merely reward them for a job poorly done.