May Yield on School Cuts, Democrats Say : Budget: But it probably wouldn’t be enough to satisfy the governor. They are increasingly fighting among themselves over how to distribute scarce dollars.

Seeking to spread the pain among several competing interests, Assembly Democrats indicated Monday that they are prepared to make further cuts in education spending but probably not enough to satisfy Gov. Pete Wilson.

Most Democrats have conceded to Wilson that they must balance the budget without raising taxes. But they increasingly are fighting among themselves over how to distribute the reductions that must come if the state, as now appears likely, spends less in the coming fiscal year than it did in the 12 months that ended June 30.

The no-new-taxes agreement has prompted a contest for scarce dollars among education, health and welfare programs and local government. Under the budget’s new math, every dollar spent on the public schools, in essence, is one that won’t be available for city and county governments or aid to the sick and the needy.

“The fact is, without any additional revenue, this is sort of a death struggle among the various interests,” said Democratic Assemblywoman Delaine Eastin of Union City, chairwoman of the Assembly Education Committee. Wilson has suggested cutting about $2 billion from the $25-billion education budget he proposed in January. Officially, Assembly Democrats have agreed to cut only $605 million from that level, which would leave schools with slightly more money per student next year than they received in the academic year just concluded.

But Eastin, who has been the schools’ primary defender in the Legislature’s lower house, said Monday that a $750-million reduction--which would give the schools the same amount per student next year--might be more realistic politically.

“You have a critical mass (of members) at about $750 million,” Eastin said.

Yet Eastin said she does not expect Assembly Democrats to go beyond that figure.

“Different people have different sorts of sacred cows they’re trying to protect,” she said. “But we think education is first among equals. It has the claim of rural and suburban and rich and poor homes across the state.”

But even the $750-million figure falls well short of the $2 billion that Wilson says must be cut to help balance his $40-billion general fund budget. And it also is $350 million less of a reduction for schools than was contained in a compromise proposal advocated last week by Republican state Sen. Frank Hill of Whittier and Democratic Assemblyman Phillip Isenberg of Sacramento.

That proposal includes a $1.1-billion cut for schools and also would take money from cities, counties, special districts and redevelopment agencies. It includes reductions, approved earlier by the Assembly-Senate conference committee, of about 7% for higher education and 10% for health and welfare programs.

The Hill-Isenberg plan is pending before the conference committee. Assembly Majority Leader Thomas M. Hannigan (D-Fairfield), who is a member of the joint committee, said Monday that it will be difficult for the schools to escape without a reduction in their per-pupil funding.

“I’m concerned about everybody being a piece of the solution,” Hannigan said. “We’re talking about cuts everywhere you go. Other areas--higher education, health and welfare--have taken substantial hits, and I don’t know how much more we can get out of those pieces.”

The increasing pressure for a greater schools cut is not confined to the Assembly. Senate Leader David A. Roberti (D-Van Nuys) said Monday that he does not believe a budget can be crafted without new taxes unless schools are cut at least $1.1 billion. The Senate voted for such a cut on June 30, but it was blocked by Democrats and a handful of Republicans in the Assembly.

“We have to be reasonable about this,” Roberti said. “I really wish the governor would have entertained closing tax loopholes, but he hasn’t. That being the case, we have a finite number of dollars to deal with. We have to protect schools--that’s our No. 1 consideration--but we have to protect police and fire, too. And at the same time we have to protect health programs, which are absolutely critical. There all kinds of things we have to protect.

“I don’t want to go back home to the city of L.A. and say I had to cut back on police and fire less than three months since the riots.”

Eastin agrees with Roberti that other traditionally Democratic interests will be sacrificed if the schools are shielded from deeper cuts. But other than raising taxes on the wealthy, she said, protecting schools is the best policy for the state.

“We really do have to decide which of our family members we’re going to take from,” she said. “So far, people are saying that kids are the most important part of the equation.”