Senate Rejects ‘Family Cap’ in Welfare Reform Debate

In a double-barreled defeat for conservative Republicans, the Senate voted Wednesday to scuttle a proposal to deny additional benefits for welfare recipients who have more babies and rejected an amendment to deny benefits to unwed teen-age mothers.

The two provisions sparked an intense emotional debate as the Senate moved toward final passage of its welfare reform legislation.

The legislation, which Senate Majority leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) said likely would come to a final vote today, would engineer the most extensive welfare changes in six decades. It is a cornerstone of the GOP effort to transfer authority from the federal government to the states.

Twenty Republicans joined all 46 Democrats in voting, 66 to 34, to defeat the “family cap” provision, which would forbid states to increase welfare checks when mothers on welfare have more babies.

The vote enraged Sens. Phil Gramm (R-Tex.) and Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.), the most ardent advocates of the provision. Faircloth vowed to oppose the final GOP-sponsored measure and Gramm, a Republican presidential contender, said that he will work with conservative colleagues in the House to try to resurrect the family cap when a House-Senate conference committee works out a compromise version of the House and Senate legislation.

“What we are doing is perpetuating a system which subsidizes illegitimacy, which gives cash bonuses to people who have more and more children on welfare,” Gramm said.

Opponents of the family cap, however, argued that the proposal would limit the ability of states to design their own welfare programs and stressed that there is no reliable evidence that a family cap would discourage women from having babies.

“If you believe that, you believe in the tooth fairy,” said Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N. M.), who offered the amendment to eliminate the family cap. It is not illogical, he said, that the provision could have prompted some pregnant welfare recipients to have abortions.

Later in the day, the Senate voted, 76 to 24, to knock down a Faircloth amendment to forbid states to give cash benefits to teen-age mothers. Faircloth and other conservatives said that they consider the provision essential to fight out-of-wedlock births.

Dole originally opposed the family cap, but he added a modified version of it to the legislation late last week to appease conservative members and powerful grass-roots groups, such as the Christian Coalition.

He defended the idea during floor debate, arguing that “the crisis in our country must be faced. Thirty percent of America’s children today are born out of wedlock. Families must face more directly whether they are ready to care for the children they bring into this world.”

By striking the two provisions, the Senate distanced itself significantly from the House, which included both in the welfare package it passed earlier this year. It also dealt a blow to the Christian Coalition and other non-Catholic conservative groups.

Ralph Reed, president of the Christian Coalition, said in an interview that he expects the provisions to be reinserted into the welfare bill when House and Senate members meet to work out their differences.

“Our view is, despite our temporary setback in the Senate, we expect the final bill to include a family cap,” Reed said. He said that the coalition also hopes that the denial of benefits to teen-age mothers will be included.

Republican and Democratic governors alike, many of whom have said that the family cap amounted to unwanted federal micromanagement, cheered the vote, as did Catholic bishops, who worried that the provision could increase abortions.

“In seeking to change the behavior of parents, these provisions hurt children and some unborn children will pay with their lives,” said Bishop John Ricard of the U.S. Catholic Conference.

The Senate also differed with the House by agreeing unanimously to compel states to maintain welfare spending at a level of at least 80% of the amount they are now spending. The “maintenance of effort” provision was a clear indication of the influence that moderate Republicans can wield when they join forces with Democrats.

The House version of welfare reform would not require states to continue to put up any of their own money.

Dole said that if the Senate is unable to vote today, he will end debate and combine welfare reform with the overall budget reconciliation package later this fall.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) won unanimous passage of a provision that would ensure that states can continue to use federal funds to provide adoption and foster care subsidies for immigrant children who are abused or neglected.

The welfare reform package makes legal immigrants ineligible for most welfare programs.

As senators moved on to other elements of the legislation Wednesday night, Republican and Democratic leaders met behind closed doors to try to strike a deal that would lead to final passage.

Among issues that the Senate has yet to decide is whether spending should be increased for child care for welfare mothers who are working or receiving job training and whether a contingency fund should be provided for states that use up their federal welfare block grants.

Under the legislation, the federal government would no longer guarantee cash assistance to every poor family. Instead, federal money would be passed to the states with few restrictions, leaving the states free to use it at their discretion.