The net neutrality debate has been ongoing to the point of exhaustion. The debate, in a broad scope, refers to the principal of an open and unbiased Internet. The concept is to provide access to the Internet without any blocking, throttling, or favoring of content being passed through the networks by the Internet service providers.

Although many thought the discussion benched for future consideration, earlier this month commission Chairman Julius Genachowski released a statement that addressed some key points in the development of the proposal. In it he added a few compromises in hopes to mitigate harsh opposition from those in the Internet industry like AT&T, Verizon, etc. 

The compromises included: the distinction of wireless broadband services as unique and consequently subject to different regulations than that of wired services; and the admiting of usage-based pricing for broadband service providers. Although the purpose of the compromises were to gain supporters of the net neutrality, it since has been receiving criticism from both sides. 

Of the five commissioners poised to vote Tuesday, the two democrat commissioners, Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn, have expressed their support--with hesitation--for the proposal as drafted by Genachwoski. Copps and Clyburn both held reservations that the policy may be too lax in its approach to enforcing regulations. Other proponents of the net neutrality seem to agree with the Copps and Clyburn. 

John Borthwick CEO of Betaworks stated on TechCrunch.com that, “The arguments that wireless should be treated separately from wireline are in my mind specious at best. Despite the fact that wireless network providers manage the network differently than wireline providers (given a need to share a limited resource among varying densities of users), wireless providers, like wireline providers, should not have the ability to discriminate against specific content, sites or applications.” 

On the other hand, the two Republican commissioners, Meredith Baker and Robert McDowell--despite any official notice--are expected to reject the policy. In a recent Wall Street Journal article, Commissioner McDowell criticized the necessity of a net neutrality policy in saying, “Nothing is broken that needs fixing, however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off from a government research project in the early 1990s.” McDowell went on to say that the commission is overreaching its authority by trying to reinforce a policy spurred on by “quixotic pressure” and not consumer protection. Recent court rulings regarding Comcast would support McDowell's accusations.

Facing criticism from both sides, Genachowski said in a recent statement to the public, “I reject both extremes in favor of a strong and sensible framework--one that protects Internet freedom and openness and promotes robust innovation and investment.” 

Only time will tell what the future of the Internet will look like, but for now it seems the imminent net neutrality proposal will pass with support of three out of five voting commissioners. Check here to see the results of Federal Commission on Tuesday. 

Reach reporter Jacob Chung here.