This is a positive thing. It turns out that we can't run government by the Executive branch and various agencies just declaring stuff, we actually have to build institutions up legislatively and inform citizens of their purpose in order to create popular support that would punish legislators that don't conform to desired norms. Obama should have cleaned house of corporate Democrats voting in the interests of their paymasters, but his elite upbringing and education inculcated an <i>actual belief</i> in the policy suggestions of the self-interested experts and corporate representatives who he considered his peers. We've already seen what an unfettered executive looks in the hands of a moron, and a elite corporate technocrat - how about a madman?<p>That being said, this article is pure propaganda and contains no information. Of course decisions made by agencies can be reversed by the combined efforts of the elected head of state and the legislature. That's why we call it a democracy. The Post gives us no reason to think he has strong feelings about this other than<p>> Trump vowed to “eliminate our most intrusive regulations” and “reform the entire regulatory code.”<p>and a single tweet<p>> Obama’s attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media.<p>And to back that up, anonymous sources saying that it's unlikely that Trump was lying about something that they haven't even made a decent case that he said he would do or even feels strongly about:<p>> "It's unlikely Trump was misleading the public, according to policy and business analysts. The new administration, they say, will instead delete from history the Federal Communications Commission's unprecedented regulations for Internet providers."<p><i>10/10 anonymous unquoted policy and business analysts agree!</i><p>This entire article is sourced to "analysts" and it's about what Trump "could" do. What he could do with the support of Congress doesn't need "analysts" it's just a point of fact. The random analysts are just to make this sound like news.<p>Here's a better headline for the article so everybody will know it's shit and not worth clicking on:<p><i>Robert Kaminski, a Telecom Analyst at Capital Alpha Partners Says: "Net Neutrality Has a Big Target On Its Back," Declines to Explain Further</i><p>edit: This isn't fake news, it's shit news. I'm not accusing the Washington Post of being a fake news outlet.