I simply got the ball rolling with a few things I’ve noticed: Most importantly, the lack of public debate on this very pertinent and important issue, but also a serious discussion on the merits of, and problems with, the internet. (Hence the Guardian debate, and I included a brief commentary on the WikiScanner, which has already answered Andrew Keen’s call for less online anonymity.)

Your addition is welcomed. I agree with most of the sentiments they express: “Market players have worked the levers of government to create a scarcity for Internet access when it is […] abundant.” Though I disagree with most of the conclusions they reached: “The Internet is the dial tone of the 21st century” is particularly scary. Apparently they want to usher in the next government sanctioned/sponsored telecom monopoly. (Maybe we’ll call this one Pa Tubes, for Ted Stevens.)

Please forgive me as I delve into the minutae:
Plank 2, the “Internet Innovation and Investment Fund,” would be a better use of funds than much of what we spend money on, but fostering competition would provide a lot more efficient expansion and minimize waste (which as an environmental hazard is probably more worthy of consideration.)

Plank 3, “Net Neutrality,” is only acceptable, or necessary, if we’re talking about a government monopoly. Market competition wouldn’t allow effective discrimination (unless consumers are happy about the discrimination.)

Plank 4, “Every Child Connected” takes an awful idea, Federal involvement in education, and then perverts it to the worst degree.

Plank 5, building a “Connected Democracy” is gospel, and should’ve been the primary focus of the piece. It is also well underway, and as I see it the main focus of this site.

Plank 6, a “National Tech Corps.” could use a better name, (I’d suggest Nat’l Tech Guard.) But it does sound like a legitimate place for Federal action. Though, I’d imagine it would be a tough task to manage. Ultimately, it might make sense to have an entire new branch of the military devoted to tech crises.

Does anyone else care about the future of this promising tool?

You bring up about a half dozen or so issues that are heavily followed by say a telecom journalist. I started writing a longer response, but realized it needed to be in 4 posts or so. In the meantime -

At the 2007 Personal Democracy Forum, Andrew Rasiej and Micah L. Sifry issued a challenge asking, “Who will be America’s First TechPresident?” The plan includes a bold 6 point proposal addressing many issues of importance to a Yochai Benkler friendly audience -no candidate has endorsed the plan.