WASHINGTON -- Even as Republican legislators have been voicing doubts this week about whether big changes to Social Security will pass Congress this year, the Bush administration is starting a 60-day barnstorming effort to try to convince Americans that it's time to overhaul the retirement system, citing Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's insistence yesterday that sooner is better than later.

	More Coverage Click here to more stories exploring the Social Security debate.

After a week at home talking with voters, GOP lawmakers, including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., returned to Capitol Hill, conceding that so far there is no groundswell favoring a change in Social Security. Democrats came back to work saying the public agrees with them that there is no Social Security crisis requiring an immediate fix.

So far, no poll shows a majority of those surveyed supporting partial privatization of Social Security, as President Bush proposes, although young workers support it more than older ones do. The White House this week dismissed these polls as meaningless at this stage.

Greenspan told Congress yesterday that the rising cost of retirement benefits, especially as millions of baby boomers begin to retire, must be dealt with "sooner rather than later." He added, "We owe future retirees as much time as possible to adjust their plans for work, saving and retirement spending." He also said, "I fear that we may have already committed more physical resources to the baby-boom generation in its retirement years than our economy has the capacity to deliver."

Treasury Secretary John Snow, preparing to blitz the country to promote personal retirement accounts, nonetheless said yesterday that the administration has no concrete plans about how to change Social Security. Right now, he said, "the more ideas the better."

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, upon returning to Washington, agreed with Frist that foes of changing the system were better organized than the White House is. He specifically mentioned AARP, the lobbying organization for older Americans, which opposes Bush's plan to let workers younger than 55 take money out of the Social Security system for personal investments.

The White House hasn't said how such a plan would work or the full impact on Social Security taxes or benefits, but it has pledged that no workers over 55 would be affected. DeLay called AARP "incredibly irresponsible" for opposing the White House proposal at this early stage.

Yet now is when hearts and minds are being made up, said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, who also opposes the president's Social Security plans. Sweeney said this week that despite the problems besetting unions, including declining membership, his unions are united in vowing to fight privatization of Social Security and will spend millions of dollars to defeat the change. "Shame on us," he said, if the administration should win its way, while still maintaining that Bush won't succeed.

The White House wants a Social Security vote this year, but Frist as of Tuesday was indicating that he couldn't say whether such a vote will be possible. DeLay also conceded that some Republicans are not committed to promoting the president's plan and failed to hold constituent town meetings about Social Security as leaders had urged them to do over the recess.

Such comments have unsettled the White House, which announced yesterday that administration officials will travel the country from March 3 through May 1 in a "coordinated 60-day tour of at least 60 stops to discuss the president's vision to strengthen and save Social Security with the American people."

Bush himself will be in Westfield, N.J., and Notre Dame, Ind., tomorrow to rally support for his plan. Snow will be campaigning for it today in Fayetteville, Ark., and tomorrow in New Orleans.

The White House took an earlier blow from House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., who would have to sign off on any Social Security changes, when he cautioned the White House not to present a detailed plan because that could backfire.