I would argue that might be a reason to favor new legislation specifically geared to these concerns, but no one enforces the laws they don't like anymore anyway. What good is even a law if the man who vows to enforce it decides not to do so (speaking of anarchy)?In your examples, the two companies that eventually got punished, were Microsoft and Intel. For the most part, they really were the only players in their field. The telecom companies, either through happenstance, or collusion, have managed to make it difficult for the government to ever step in again. If there are 4 cell service carriers, how can there be a monopoly? If there are 6 or 7 cable/internet companies, how can there be a monopoly? The issue is that in certain markets, there really is no competition. The companies don't even try to compete due to the barrier to entry from an infrastructure standpoint. It is much easier to buy the local provider in an area, than to try and move in and out compete. So to think that the government will be able to use the same arguments as they did in Microsoft and Intel seems a bit of a stretch.
I guess my point is this, the FCC has already tried to use 706 to stop the companies from doing what I feel most fear, which is the fast lanes concept becoming common place. There really isn't another alternative that I am aware of, that would not require legislation which I think we both realize would likely make it worse, other than common carrier status. I am open for alternatives, but the first one (using 706) you argued quite succinctly upon, seems to have already been tried and discounted in the courts. What are the other, non legislative alternatives? My main worry is that if it doesn't get done in the next two years, and the Republicans get control of the WH, it will never get done, at which point it will be too late as the entrenched ways of doing business will be too hard to remove. That coupled with this is all kind of a moot point because if the Republicans do get the WH, and an even bigger lobbyist gets put in charge of the FCC, who is to say that they won't just switch it back?
ETA: Generally speaking, new regulations usually end up written in a way that protects the old companies and creates barriers to new entrants in the market. Not sure you are going to get what you want with new regulation.