It does, and I acknowledged earlier in the thread it would require an enforcement mechanism. But there's a large difference in giving the government a SPECIFIC set of rules that it can enforce, and giving the government the carte blanche options for enforcement and new regulation that comes with declaring it a utility.Requiring all data packets to be treated the same is a form of regulation and it does require some enforcement mechanism.
A specific law would be a form of regulation, but one created by the legislation rather than a regulatory agency. That means whatever body charged with enforcing it (I basically said it'd likely still be the FCC) is bound by the criteria's and limits of said law. Meaning it's very difficult for it to expand beyond that law without additional legislation, putting a bit of a potential stop gap on the government expanding beyond simple neutrality standards.
By making it a utility, you're giving the regulatory agency a FAR wider field in which it can create new and additional regulation that it wants to enforce, as the laws regarding utilities are already on the books and are far more widely acted upon than a simple net neutrality bill would allow.