The problem is the cost per item. This is more than just a subsidy, it's simply paying for getting the entire job done and if that were the case, why doesn't the government just contract that job out.
No matter what the Federal government does, someone will be dissatisfied with the result...
May as well go with a company that at least has a chance of knowing what they're doing. Century Link is by no means my favorite, but they're not Comcast either.
If all of our stuff is going to be networked, having us be the gatekeepers for our own security is paramount.
Because you can't design something intended to be remotely accessible and not expect there is a likelihood of someone else being able to access it.
The problem is there's currently no model of security that works for nontechnical users that doesn't involve an outside party. As long as there's an outside party there's a vector of exploit, even if it's simply the field service consultant jotting-down the passwords and keeping his notes as he leaves.
What we need is a standard that allows for local-control to the exclusion of the original vendor or manufacturer for those of us that are capable of managing our own devices, while allowing nontechnical owner-users to use that vendor-provided support if they're unable or unwilling to do it themselves or to pay someone else to set it up privately. Right now we're not seeing that, and consuming these made-for-marketing brochures won't show us that even if the local-control aspect did exist.
Happiness is a hard disk.