Word has it that the Internet is on the brink of a takeover.

Egged on by radical interests, the FCC is poised to impose onerous regulations to guide the medium to a more “open” future. No matter that the Internet is perhaps one of the greatest success stories ever. And that a key to its success rests in the fact that government has stepped out of the way, letting developers and networks do what they do best – serve Americans with cutting-edge communications tools at affordable prices.

All of this is meaningless, of course, when the whip count and brute bureaucratic force are in your favor.

You see, Washington just learned that a bill, which could stop the FCC’s plans, is in deep jeopardy. The bill’s sponsor – Representative Henry Waxman – doesn’t have enough Republican support to credibly move the legislation through Congress. Lacking this, the proposal is basically dead in the water (even before formal introduction), having virtually no practical effect on the rogue FCC.

On any other day I wouldn’t shed a single crocodile tear hearing this news. Not today, however. Said Waxman, “If our efforts to find bipartisan consensus fail, the FCC should move forward.”

This will have significant repercussions.

I have long advocated that the Internet does not need regulating. Technology, marketplace dynamics, consumer education, reputation management, current competition law and industry best practices all work together to make sure that the Internet remains open. Though the naysayers cry otherwise, the still-unregulated Internet is anything but broken. With each day, new services come on line, serving more and more Americans with Internet services.

But since the present Administration came to town, radical interests have captured policymakers at the FCC. Over the past two years, they have enjoyed immense success in peddling the idea that the Internet is in danger of breaking unless Washington comes to the rescue.

How so?

Well, groups like MoveOn.org, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Free Press, Public Knowledge, and the New America Foundation (not to mention a far-too-willing mainstream media) fear “evil corporations” will “close” the Internet, “cable-izing” it so that free speech and the “little guy” get shut out. To prevent this, they have offered a simple plan – hogtie the very companies that bring the Internet to Americans through 19th Century-inspired Net Neutrality regulations. In their view, by regulating networks like plain old telephone companies, the laws of economics will be suspended, and all will be well for the little guy.

Sitting pretty to accomplish this task is the FCC. After all, instead of going to Congress and working 535 Members, all the radical lobbyists have to do is roll just three Commissioners. That’s right. Just three, unelected bureaucrats, who can decide the fate of nearly 20% of our economy.

For the better part of the past year, the FCC has developed quite a record to saddle the Internet with innovation-killing regulation. Thankfully, election year dynamics have slowed the FCC in developing final rules to reclassify Internet services as fully regulated telephone services. But, it’s just a matter of time if Congress doesn’t occupy that space quickly.

Just after the ’08 elections, it looked like Net Neutrality would be the law of the land. President Obama ran on a plank that promoted Net Neutrality. $7 billion of stimulus money was in fact dedicated to Net Neutrality projects, ostensibly to boost our economy. And, when it came time to confirm a new Chairman of the FCC, a staunch advocate of the idea – Julius Genachowski – was chosen. With more important matters to consider, Congress receded from the picture, leaving the FCC at the helm.

Recent events have changed this. Throughout this spring and summer – prompted by a court decision that put in doubt the FCC’s specific authority to regulate the Internet – Congress has come back to the debate. Fearing it would lose valuable jurisdiction if it allowed the FCC to act in this vacuum, a majority of House members on both sides of the aisle signed a letter urging the FCC to refrain from regulating the Internet without an express congressional grant.

And, just this past week, a promising, yet imperfect alternative to the FCC’s takeover has emerged – the Waxman proposal.

Waxman’s bill would temporarily codify basic Net Neutrality principles (yes, similar to what the FCC has proposed) until the end of 2012. Surprising as that may be, what makes the proposal worthy of serious consideration is its stance on the FCC’s authority. Basically, it says to the agency, “Congress makes policy for the Internet, and we want you to get out of the way.” To this end, it prohibits the FCC from reclassifying Internet services as telephone services, which is a huge deal. This presents a nearly insurmountable obstacle to the Commission and its supportive radicals who want to regulate the Internet as if it were a public utility.

I understand many Republicans’ reluctance to get on board with this plan. I, too, worry that it gives far too much legitimacy to the idea of Internet regulation.

But I’m also a realist. The FCC could initiate its unilateral takeover tomorrow if it wanted.

The introduction of the bill alone sends an important signal. It puts Congress back on top where it should be. Moreover, it marginalizes those who espouse an endless maze of FCC regulation that will – unequivocally – harm the Internet and its bright promise.

This may be the last, best chance to stop the FCC before it goes over the brink and irreparably damages the Internet. House Republicans should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. They should strongly reconsider helping corral a rogue FCC through the Waxman bill.