Uh, what you seem to have is actual competition going on in your area. More regulation will not necessarily help bring about more of that. I do agree that Ajit Pai seems to be a giant toolbox.
Federal regulation trumping (or not, as it were) state xxxxxxxxxx [edit out "regulation"; I meant to type "legislation"] that had been purchased and manipulated by large, private ISP's (the Bell babies, Comcast et al.) to eliminate competition.
Note further that those big ISP's often secured substantial (i.e. enormous) tax breaks and other incentives, in return for agreeing to "universal broadband deployment" in the relevant state/community's service area. They have almost universally reneged on their side of these agreements, sometimes e.g. lobbying the state legislature to let them out of their side of the agreement almost before the ink is dry on their signature to it.
Going back in time, early trunk capacity was to a significant extent government built and government owned. There wouldn't have been an "Internet" without the Feds. And, once opened up, they kept access on a rather equal footing. This might not have all been "codified" regulation -- though I guess that and/or a set of "operating rules" grew somewhat organically. But it certainly controlled and set precedent.
So, both presently and in the past, "regulation" has actually fostered competition.
And yeah, the corporate lawyer is a giant tool. Quelle surprise!