But the serious question being posed is: Is it fundamentally good policy to force every single taxpayer to have to pay for this government protection even if they don't mind being called? What is the cost going to be? Pennies per person, tops? I'm okay with making telemarketers pay for the costs of the FDNC list, if that makes you feel better.
Next question: If you worked in an industry where you relied on telephone solicitation, wouldn't you be hacked off?
Sure, but 50+ million people were sufficiently pissed off at telemarketers' business practices that they signed up for the FDNC list.
The telemarketing industry should have seen this coming. An industry must either regulate itself, or government will end up doing it for them. Government regulation always ends up being far worse than self-regulation.
Okay, you almost have me swayed (actually at this point I'm neutral on the matter). But first some more objections from a devil's advocate position.
What if I'm not okay with my tax money paying for this government protection?
What if the way you've estimated costs is not accurate, and the median household cost is something closer to $20 annually? Would that change things knowing you could get a device or service cheaper than that?
We know that e-mail is going to be next and some people are fine with that too. How will we react when the come after commercial mail? Is this far fetched? Then billboards!