President Bush and his cronies are trapsing around the country trying to sell privatization of Social Security to the American people, but at what cost to the taxpayer (most of whom do not want Bush to get rid of the program)? The Washington Post's Jonathan Weisman reports on the quest to find the answer to this important question.

The Bush administration's ongoing Social Security blitz is unusual in scale in the selling of a domestic policy, mobilizing the president and vice president, four Cabinet secretaries and 17 lesser officials, down to an associate director of strategic planning for the White House budget office.

It also may be one of the most costly in memory, well into the millions of dollars, according to some rough, unofficial calculations.

House Appropriations Committee Republicans have quietly asked the administration for an accounting of its "60 Stops in 60 Days" blitz. And yesterday, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee, formally asked the Government Accountability Office not only for the cost but also "whether the Bush Administration has crossed the line from education to propaganda."

[...]

Even Republicans raised their eyebrows when they heard new employees were brought on for the campaign, said a House Republican staff member, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid embarrassing the president.

It's perfectly fine for business interests to dump tens of millions of dollars into the attempt to bamboozle Americans into buying privatization. If they believe it to be in their interest, it's their prerogative.

When the US government starts spending taxpayer money for a tremendous political effort, serious warning flags must be raised. Is it really kosher for the President to put the weight of the federal government behind his efforts to usurp more power for the Republican Party? Should the nation spend potentially tens of millions of dollars to promote an unpopular policy that has slight chances of passing when there are so many other priorities?

The answer to these questions is a resounding no. Hopefully the GAO will agree.