Are you sure about the cost Tom? Due to her pet project her husband signed into law a drug enforcement bill in the late 80's which had an initial cost of $1.7 Billion. Personally, I do remember all the television & print advertisements that ran at that time. Yes, it was highly effective, and the cost has increased exponentially over the years because that law is still in effect, advertising continues to this day, and it is being taught in the schools as part of the curriculum. Congress approves the budget for it every year. That law has cost us billions over the past 20 something years. I am not complaining, just pointing out the costliness of another First Lady's pet project.
Agreed. I suspect the only people who would disagree with this are the ones milking the system.
I really do agree with you here. However, this goes back to my point regarding cronyism throughout history. Every administration hides salaries of their "pet" appointments. It bites. No question about it. But, why should this administration's covertness be any more objectionable than any previous one?