The notion that the government knows better how to improve on a competitive marketplace is not supported by the evidence.

Any government mandates, and certainly for any one of those options (suggested by Martin), in our view is very clearly under Supreme Court precedent a violation of the First Amendment.

Government-mandated multi-casting requirements ... would constitute a 'taking' of cable operators' private property, which, in the absence of 'just compensation,' is prohibited by the Fifth Amendment.

Such a massive government intrusion into how a broadband service like video is marketed, offered and priced would undoubtedly chill the needed innovation and investment necessary to build out capital intensive networks that rely on the marketplace to determine the most economically effective way to provide a return on investment.

The government must avoid picking winners and losers by imposing regulation based on the particular mix of technology a video provider deploys.

No false claim [by the Bells] is going to go unchallenged. And second, no false and negative ad campaign is going to go without a response.