Is it even reasonable to say that the preference for regulation of net neutrality is based on a fear of a hypothetical situation, seeing as the exact fears of abuse that those who are pro net neutrality have expressed have become reality multiple times in the past when the regulation was more laxe, by Pai's own admission (and Steve's brief summing up of the history on this topic)? The problem did exist, ISPs have abused this situation in the past, and, aside from hand waving, there seems to be no reason to think they won't do so in the future if doing so is in their financial interest, particularly if users have little choice of providers.