The difference with Ajit Pai is that he has years of recent history making statements which are often ungrounded in reality but consistently very friendly to large ISPs. Ars Technica's covered that a lot over the years (
https://arstechnica.com/search/?ie=UTF-8&q=ajit+pai) – here are some highlights:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/12/fccs-a...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/ajit-pai-net-neut...
“Strong net neutrality rules in the US would give authoritarian states an excuse to strengthen their grip over the Internet, Federal Communications Commission member Ajit Pai reportedly said today.”
(see also http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015...)
And, when network neutrality didn't go his way, he asked Congress to sabotage enforcement:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/03/new-tactic-in-war-on...
http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/05/ajit-pai-votes-again...
He objected to the Charter TWC merger on the grounds that it should NOT have conditions prohibiting “imposing data caps and overage fees on Internet customers, charging large online content providers for network interconnection, and stifling growth of online video by demanding restrictive clauses in contracts with programmers.”
He's convinced the bad guy in the paid fast lane program is Netflix, not the ISPs trying to double-charge for service and made some truly bizarre claims about how open standards work:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/12/netfli...
When Congress was investigating the network neutrality rule-making process, he flat out refused to supply the requested documents to the committee:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/fcc-re...
When the FCC chairman tried to set a modern definition for broadband speed, he opposed it:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/01/fcc-chairman-mocks-i...
One of two votes against opening up cable box competition:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/02/fcc-votes-to-unlock-...
He was one of the two votes against a cap on the rates phone companies charge prison inmates:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/prison-phone-comp...