Recessions Make for Unhappy Budgets

Against the dreary backdrop of a fourth year of state deficits, Gov. Pete Wilson is again squeezing down on the expense side of the social welfare budget. In one area--welfare reform--he has the public policy right, but the cuts he proposes won’t fly. In another area--prenatal aid to immigrants--neither the policy nor the cuts will fly.

Wilson is challenging Sacramento to strengthen the link between welfare assistance and work. On this big issue he’s absolutely right, and Californians will benefit if this debate results, as it did last year, in important bipartisan welfare reforms.

However, the proposed budget would cut welfare payments by as much as 25%, eliminate additional benefits when a baby is born to a woman receiving welfare, and limit to two years the time a person is allowed to be on welfare. These proposals--particularly the big cut in aid, absent significant new housing subsidies--probably won’t survive the Legislature. But if a sturdy safety net were in place, the time limit idea certainly would be worth exploring.

The Clinton Administration is considering a similar limit. After the deadline, recipients still could get benefits, but only if they worked at community service jobs. The American Public Welfare Assn., which represents state and local welfare administrators, endorses, with qualifications, such a deadline. Several of Wilson’s welfare proposals indeed merit support, including his plan to require teen-age mothers, in most circumstances, to live with a parent or guardian to qualify for aid. This would help ensure some supervision and protect young mothers from men who have their eyes on their welfare checks. And his proposed crackdown on welfare fraud is worth trying.

Wilson also seeks to end prenatal care to illegal immigrants in order to save $92 million; some of the savings would go to well-baby care for low-income citizens and legal residents, a worthy purpose. The state cannot afford both programs, says Wilson. Yet, is pitting one poor group against another the best public policy? After all, the problem originates with Washington’s abject failure to control the borders--and its unconscionable failure to reimburse the state for its cost in providing for illegal immigrants. The governor’s real beef is with Washington. That’s why he wants at least $2.3 billion in federal reimbursements for fiscal 1994-95.

For many years Wilson has championed prenatal and preventive care. Cutting off all such care to illegal immigrant mothers eventually would result in greater state costs; cutting welfare too deeply would punish poor children. This does not sound like vintage Pete Wilson. It sounds more like a state budget held hostage to California’s continuing severe recession. Though cuts are unavoidable, other ways must be found to spread the pain.