The measures were placed in jeopardy by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's (R-Texas) language which she planned to insert into an Interior Department appropriations bill.  The language would blocking financing enforcement of the new FCC rules – many Republicans supported the measure. 

However, opponents on the other side of the aisle pointed out that the ownership of ISPs had given the Republican party much support and would stand to profit from the death of net neutrality.  And Republicans in many state legislative bodies, such as North Carolina, have supported the imposition of greater government restrictions on telecommunications, in efforts to effectively outlaw municipal Wi-Fi, which might outcompete the overpriced limited commercial ISP offerings that currently exist.

In the eleventh hour, they backed down, though, thanks to the FCC staff reaching out to them.  A Republican staffer stated to The Washington Post, "While we are still generally opposed to net neutrality regulations, we have decided to hold off on the amendment because [FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski] approached us and we are beginning a dialogue."

The real debate will likely occur in October when the proposal is officially presented.  It will then go through a regularly scheduled notice of proposed rule making (NPRM), a session in which the ISPs and Republicans will likely push the FCC to relax certain parts of the rules or make changes.

Industry sentiment on the new measures vary.  AT&T wants to make the enforcement even stronger -- but exempt wireless services from the provisions.  Virgin's CEO, on the other hand, recently remarked that net neutrality was a "load of bullocks".  Verizon opposed the measure, while Comcast gave it some praise.  Industry groups commented that the bill had some good parts, despite expressing concerns as well.