If I understand your comment, you got it backwards. It's us, the consumer that could suffer. It would provide artificial competition. A less liked service could be given higher speeds, while the preferred Netflix does not. As it is now, if a new service is used more, it will be because people think it is better, and Neflix would have to adjust. That's called the free market.
While I am torn because I do not like Government regulations in these matters, it is they who enabled where we have ended up to where we are.
There is little competition in many areas, you get DSL or one choice of high speed Cable internet. That's due to the original Government regulations that let one provider into an area. It was under the misguided thought that no one would want to string cables independently to serve rural areas. So if given exclusive rights they would do it. Well, first they didn't go beyond certain points and second competition as it always does would have provided lower costs and possibly more people served by now.
So because of that many places have effectively a monopoly. When that exists I do favor certain regulation to protect us. Do you really think Comcast is going to allow Slingbox for instance to be used at the same speed as their own service? Or Verizon allow Dish Anywhere at top speed? That is what will happen. Maybe even blocking content. This goes even beyond slowing down your favorite online service.
Making an internet provider simply give you service, without editorial speed control isn't too much to ask.
being the "almost". We once had a fixed point wireless provider in the DC metropolitan area, but it went belly up long ago.
