One thing to consider. What is to be gained by lifting the neutrality rules? If nothing changes, then nobody wins or loses. Anything that does change will be a loss for consumers. There really is no upside to the most recent change. ISPs were experimenting with different pricing packages prior to the new rules that would have become a problem. Content providers such as Netflix were beginning to have enough compelling content to start looking like a real competitor. Putting neutrality rules in place provide a modicum of protection for their growth.
DISCLAIMER (the below is from memory, which is admittedly imperfect).
Remember back in the early days of broadcast TV when you had only VHF and UHF to choose from. The government realized that to eliminate the "tower of babble" they had to regulate who had what frequencies. This provided some assurances that content could reach homes and accelerated the growth of network television. Homes that were unable to receive broadcast signals turned to bringing the signal via cables attached to antennae located up on a hill. Cable TV was, originally, just bringing broadcast TV to homes that could not get the signal any other way. (CATV or Community Antenna TV) It began to expand as companies found they could receive more on-air channels with better antennae and distribute many more channels than a home would otherwise get. Stations could then reach more homes. As the adoption of cable grew, new innovators thought they could create their own "channel" only available to cable subscribers. This was to satisfy the greater consumer demand than broadcast TV could deliver. The FCC was limiting licenses. CATV was coming up with new ways to receive more content and add channels from other communities, some using microwave to transmit signals and bring broadcast TV from a wider area to more consumers. Local communities and CATV providers began to create exclusive contracts similar to utilities that meant you only had one CATV choice to your home. By this time, the FCC was paying close attention and there were new regulations and legal challenges. The FCC created a "must carry" rule that required CATV providers to carry all broadcast signals to their subscribers. Lower Power VHF licenses were issued with the though that local communities could choose to create more broadcast TV options and due to the must carry rule, reach many more homes. Community access TV was also required by FCC regulation. A new competitor was rapidly gaining steam. Satellite TV. What was first the domain of the hobbyist putting up a large dish to get the "free" content that others had to pay for turned into a business. Broadcasters and pay TV channels were forced to develop better methods to secure their signal or risk losing their revenue base. The FCC struggled to figure out if and how it should regulate these delivery mediums. Broadcast TV was regulated of course. It had to be. Broadcasters were lobbying the FCC to regulate these mediums as well. They were fearful of the competition, especially as consumers were starting to turn to these non-broadcast channels. Broadcasters were losing advertising revenue as consumers viewed other content, especially content not subjected to the broadcast TV decency rules.
So here we ended up. Many choices for content. Almost 15 years ago, Cable TV was king. DirecTV was growing and Broadcast networks were launching their own CATV channels and buying up other (e.g. ESPN). Consumers were growing increasingly weary of the high prices and limited choices. HDTV was here and some were discovering that old UHF antenna on the roof could bring an HD signal to their TV. Those early cord-cutters still wanted high speed internet though, mostly to watch cat videos. Around that time consumers could also find audio streaming content and the concept of broadcast streaming began. Speeds were still relatively slow, which meant that the Internet was not much of an early threat to traditional content. That would change, of course. Both compression technology and bandwidth increases enabled Netflix to launch a commercial streaming service over the Internet. I bought my first blueray player with netflix streaming capability built in. It also included audio streaming service Pandora. I still own that Samsung unit. from several years back. I think it was 2008 or 2009.
The reason I walked down memory lane is to highlight what I believe to be interesting similarities in the evolution of how content is provided to our homes. The FCC struggled early on to figure out what and how to regulate cable TV providers as broadcast TV providers cried foul with up and coming content providers threatening their revenue stream. Same is true now. Delivery networks that made significant investments (and heavily charge consumers to recover that investment) want the "freedom" to develop a revenue model that protects that investment. Consumers have limited choices. Where I live, if I want high speed Internet, I can choose AT&T U-verse (still over copper) with maximum bandwidth of 25Mb/s or TimeWarner Cable where I have over 300Mb/s. There are no choices. There is no real competition.
Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountain is going home; that wildness is necessity; John Muir