You mention economists as though they would have something useful to add. But they're social scientists : they produce opinions, not facts. Nothing they offer is more than guesswork because they can only observe previous behaviour and attempt to use it to predict future behaviour - without ever knowing if the conditions that it occurred in and perhaps caused it are comparable.
When economists start behaving like proper scientists, their suggestions might be good for something more worthwhile than politics.
The comment that 'only 11 percent of economists support net neutrality' is telling. You have an 11/89% difference of opinion ? That means something is very seriously wrong with the 'science'. If you had a 1/99% difference, you could dismiss the 1% as mavericks or bought, like the climate change deniers. But with a mismatch like that, you simply don't have a clear view. Science isn't something you can vote. It's not a question of a majority. It's a matter of proof, or, until that's available, consensus, and you haven't got one. Come back when you have.