If you don't think that ISPs would use every excuse to raise prices you are nuts.
Perhaps you're forgetting that we live in a capitalistic society meaning: competition! Sure, they may charge more, as they already can (they just don't have the inscentive as of yet), but if you think that they'll all charge high prices and all charge more, perhaps you're not aware of the capitalistic society that we're actually living in!
I'm willing to be that some of the big names wouldn't charge more for access to other ports.
They will either charge more for a 'safe' package because they are protecting your children. Or they will charge more for one with all ports because it is 'unlimited access'. Not hard to see how it will happen...
Well, the idea is that of allowing access to the public port, leaving other ports avaliable at request.
Come to think of it:
I don't want to end up paying extra
5 bucks says that you're not paying your own bill, and that you don't know how much it is. 5 bucks says that in 15 years when this bill has been in effect for quite some time (because there's not much of a reason to vote against it), you'll be paying the same or less (adjusted for inflation) for access to all standard ports. (Who knows? It could spark up ports dedicated to IGN-type sites, etc.)
And porn is a problem. There's a huge industry out there targeting kids. It's factual that it's a problem. Moral, immoral aside, it's clearly the root of many problems that kids can have as a result of the total anoymnoty of the internet.
EDIT: Point is that it seems socialistic to be against it for the reason that the ISPs have the freedoms that accompany a capitilastic society. Again, they could already be charging extra for access to all ports.
EDIT 2: So "prices" aside (an extra 2 bucks may turn out to be killer!
j/k), any reason to be against the bill?