If Jeb manages to become the third Bush to lead the United States, those who support net neutrality will have some genuine cause for concern. In a letter posted to his campaign website this week, Jeb wants to tackle what he dubs a "Regulatory Crisis", with one of the bullet-points being net neutrality - something he deems unfair. Interestingly, he wants to "make regulators accountable to Americans rather than special interests", which seems like the exact opposite of what he's proposing.
He argues that instead of "enhancing consumer welfare", ISPs are unable to grow and expand because they're not able to charge other companies that use more of their traffic. He cites specific ISPs in rural towns that have had to stop expanding their networks.
What's interesting about Jeb's argument is that he's not favoring the big ISPs that combat net neutrality, but instead the "little guys". It does seem that we're missing some information, though. These ISPs mentioned are incredibly small (~500 and ~8,000 customers, respectively), so it's hard to gauge what the real impact is, or why net neutrality is affecting them to such a degree.
It's also an interesting argument to raise given the fact that those who are all for net neutrality tend to be pretty passionate about it, and this opinion would likely thwart those same people from voting for him. It could be that Jeb believes there are far more out there that are against net neutrality than those that are for it, which could be true. It could also be true that most people simply don't understand net neutrality and will read Jeb's message and believe it to be right.
With net neutrality rules taking effect only this past summer, it'd be horrible to see it canned so soon without actually being able to see its long-term affects and benefits.