Many of Clinton Initiatives Likely to Face Delays

The policy proposals rolled out by President Clinton in his State of the Union address Tuesday night fall generally into two categories: A few that he can carry out without Congress’ help, and many more that probably won’t get done this year.

Perhaps the flashiest of the ideas in Clinton’s address to Congress was a suggestion to give $1,000 scholarships grants to students who are rated academically in the top 5% of their high school senior class.

The program, estimated by the White House to cost about $125 million a year, would go a long way for many state-school students, whose tuition costs typically run about several thousand dollars a year.

It is the kind of idea that has won favor from Republicans in the past. They have been more inclined to favor programs that would reward top students, and those in the middle class, while the Democrats have traditionally viewed federal education programs as chiefly for poorer pupils.

Yet this year education experts don’t expect Congress to adopt any new spending proposals. That’s partly because of a reluctance to pile up new federal expenses in this year of heightened deficit-consciousness, and partly out of a fear of allowing Clinton to add any legislative victories.

For the same reason, Clinton may have a hard time with his proposal for a program that would connect more schools’ computer systems to the Internet. This idea has also had some GOP backing, and won some general support from Rep. William F. Goodling (R-Pa.), chairman of the House Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee.

But the issue has centered on who would pay the cost of the upgrades, and it’s not clear the congressional majority would take on the expense at this particular moment. Similarly, Clinton’s proposal to increase federally subsidized work study programs for college students might also curry Republican favor--if this were a different year.

“He’s laying out his views here for what he might do if he’s reelected, and if he gets a more agreeable Congress,” said Jack Jennings, a former congressional staffer who is director of the nonprofit Center on National Educational Policy in Washington. “But at this point, I don’t think Congress is going to give him anything.”

Clinton also spoke glowingly of the notion of having public school students wear uniforms to school. That idea, which has been put into practice by fewer than 1% of public school districts, is catching on--but, of course, Clinton has no jurisdiction over such local issues.

Congressional analysts expect some of Clinton’s recycled proposals from earlier years will have similarly tough sledding. The proposals to enable employees to carry health insurance from job to job, and to require insurers to issue policies to employees with preexisting conditions are not likely to pass the Senate.

The president’s proposal to raise the minimum wage--raised last year--is expected to again go nowhere, nor is his 14-month-old plan to give the families tuition credits of up to $10,000 a year.

One legislative proposal with a better chance is the idea of giving companies tax incentives to clean up and develop the growing inventory of abandoned, polluted urban spaces. Big city mayors and the Environmental Protection Agency like this idea, and business-oriented Republicans like it because corporations could get relief from some of the tougher environmental cleanup rules if they go along.

Clinton’s call for TV makers to add a “V-chip” so that parents can screen out violent shows does have a good chance--mostly because it had wide bipartisan support before Clinton entered the picture. The president’s call to get the entertainment industry to voluntarily produce more wholesome TV fare, on the other hand, is running into steadfast opposition from the industry, which considers such talk as tantamount to censorship.

In a whole different category are policy changes that Clinton can accomplish by administration action. But some of these may be more incremental.

Clinton’s executive order to prohibit federal contracting with companies that have hired illegal aliens sounds like common sense. And analysts on both sides of the issue believe it may have a bracing effect on contractors who haven’t been paying attention to whether their employees have papers indicating they are legally in the United States.

But even some pro-immigration policy analysts say the order is likely to be less of a club than it appears. For one thing, the sanction can be applied only after companies have been caught knowingly employing illegals. The word “knowingly” is critical. It means that if a company hires illegal immigrants who have genuine-looking papers, they are off the hook.

Clinton’s new war on drug gangs is an extension of an existing program. The president has sent a directive to the FBI and other investigative agencies to target gangs that involve juveniles in violent crime, “a natural offshoot of the anti-violent crime initiative” that Atty. Gen. Janet Reno launched in March 1994, a Justice Department official said.

But the latest effort will call for federal agents to help track gang migration, as drug-pushing street gangs naturally seek new markets. He said FBI Director Louis J. Freeh had promised the White House to step up emphasis on gangs involving juveniles.

Times staff writer Ronald J. Ostrow contributed to this story.