Neither of those were caused by the "wolves regulating themselves". They were both caused by laws passed by Congress both having something to do with taxes and interest. The dotcom bubble was caused by taxes on dividends being kept the same but capital gains taxes being lowered. This led to a huge influx of investors moving from high dividend investments to low dividend/high volitility investments. The bubble popped because some large companies like Dell placed HUGE sell orders which cause panic and caused everyone to sell as fast as they could which cause the crash which was also made worse by 9/11, the date the entire stock market dropped over 10% because of a terrorist attack. The housing bubble was similarly caused by interest rates and lending practices. Remember the lending practices were deregulated because the public wanted them to be because they wanted easier access to home loans. These 2 things left people with things they could not afford. They are also part of the reason the government does not really listen to the majority when making big decisions. People here seem to keep forgetting, we are not a democracy. We are a democratic republic. The only thing the people have the right to vote on in the US is who represents them, not what choices their representative make.
If this were true why did the companies want to get rid of it? If it were regulated like a utility service then why didn't the ISPs bill it like a utility service. Both water and electric are charged according to usage. If the only switch was making it so it was regulated like a utility service then why did these ISPs not go the route of making more money by charging Facebook, Netflix, etc for the upstream and downstream activity? Utility companies are natural monopolies which mean they make economic profits in the long run. ISPs are closer to a monopolistic competition which means they will eventually break even.