Reform Bill Assailed as Nightmare for County

For Los Angeles County, struggling to recover from its worst fiscal crisis ever, word that President Clinton will sign a sweeping welfare reform bill is a nightmare come true.

Officials immediately began trying to determine where the hundreds of millions of dollars will come from to provide for tens of thousands of people who may look to the county for assistance.

“It’s devastating to the county,” said Supervisor Gloria Molina. “This is going to probably bankrupt us.”

Under state law, counties are the “safety net” of last resort for those who have nowhere else to turn. And with a huge population of legal immigrants and citizens on welfare, perhaps no county in the country will be pinched more by the drastic changes.

A preliminary analysis estimated that if 93,000 county residents--all legal immigrants--lose their Supplemental Security Income and seek general assistance from the county, the price tag could amount to $236 million a year.

In addition, 300,000 legal immigrants in the county could be denied food stamps. And depending upon actions at the state level, legal immigrants could lose their Medi-Cal benefits. This could cost the county another $100 million a year.

The county has not determined what the impact will be in the long run on other welfare recipients.

“It’s going to be terrible for L.A. County,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles), who opposed the legislation. “It’s going to deny help to legal aliens, even people here legally for 20 years. If they’re denied medical services, the county will have to give them care and there will be no federal money to pay for it.”

For the Board of Supervisors, which has struggled to rebound from last year’s fiscal crisis and is just beginning to restructure the county’s hospital-heavy health system with a federal bailout, the potential financial burden is another powerful blow.

“It never ends,” said Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke.

The president’s announcement drew howls of protest from the three Democrats--all Clinton allies--who dominate the Board of Supervisors and had opposed the welfare reform bill.

Molina, a co-chairwoman of Clinton’s first campaign, decried the Republican-controlled Congress for not considering the impact of welfare reform on local government.

“All the legal immigrants who are being taken off the welfare rolls are going to end up at our doorstep,” she said, adding that she was “very disappointed that the president has to go this far.”

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, whose district is home to many legal immigrants from Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union and China, said the county would suffer nearly 20% of the entire impact of the elimination of benefits for such residents nationwide.

“It still leaves a huge question mark about the financial impact on the county government, the county treasury,” he said. “More importantly, how is it going to impact peoples lives?”

The county’s chief administrative office estimated that California will lose over $10 billion in federal assistance to legal immigrants in the next six years, nearly half of that earmarked for Los Angeles County.

The potential impact on the county could be softened if more legal immigrants become U.S. citizens. But already there is a huge backlog of applicants seeking to become American citizens, many of whom have long been fearful that such proposals would become law. “There is no excuse for any person eligible to become a citizen not to become a citizen,” Yaroslavsky said.

Currently, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service is grappling with an unprecedented demand for citizenship, with about 1.2 million new applicants expected in the current fiscal year. Los Angeles leads the nation in such citizenship requests.

“We’ve made a significant dent in that workload,” said Rosemary Melville, deputy INS district director in Los Angeles, who noted that 60,000 new citizens were scheduled to be sworn in this month.

However, SSI beneficiaries, by definition aged, blind or disabled, often find the citizenship test a daunting obstacle. Among other things, applicants must demonstrate knowledge of U.S. civics and the English language.

Republicans generally hailed the president’s decision.

Board of Supervisors Chairman Mike Antonovich, a staunch supporter of welfare reform, asked Gov. Pete Wilson to call a special session of the state Legislature to deal with impact of the welfare reform bill. Antonovich said counties need to be exempted “from paying welfare to legal immigrants.”

At the state Capitol, Wilson said the legislation doesn’t go far enough.

The governor complained that the measure does not reform the Medicaid program for the poor, known in California as Medi-Cal. And it prohibits the state from eliminating its supplement to SSI payments, which will cost California taxpayers more than $270 million a year.

A spokesman for the governor said administration officials will meet next week to review how the state can implement the welfare changes and whether state legislation is needed.

“What the House of Representatives did pass . . . is certainly an improvement over the current system,” Wilson said. “No longer will California be required to receive federal permission to promote work by reducing welfare grants, or end outdated policies which reward teenage pregnancy, or stop the destructive cycle of dependency.”

Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-Santa Clarita), who voted for the legislation, said it was “imperative to change the system that has not been working for so many years, to get people off their dependency on the dole, so they can stand on their own feet.”

McKeon said that the bill requires sponsors of legal immigrants to help bear the financial responsibility for those they bring to the U.S.

Immigrant advocates outside the County Hall of Administration said that at least 10 people have begun a hunger strike aimed at convincing the president to veto the legislation.

“How can our country welcome foreign visitors to the Olympic Games, and at the same time destroy the safety net for our foreign-born residents?” asked Christopher J. Tan of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center.

As they began hearing about Clinton’s decision, the reaction from recipients at a Van Nuys welfare office ranged from modified support to pleas that some continuing assistance is necessary.

Although she has been on welfare for the past two years, 20-year-old Jennifer Riesland agrees that the amount of time anyone can receive such aid should be limited.

“Since I’ve been on welfare, I’ve met a lot of people who choose to stay on welfare,” she said. “So I think we need to give people an allotted amount of time and then they should have to get off.”

Even so, Riesland said a country without some economic safety net would create a hardship for too many poor people. “What if you are 15 and pregnant with nowhere to go? Then you would need some help. But if you are 29 and on your seventh child and still receiving money, then that’s a problem.”

Riesland said she has applied for a job bagging groceries at a Lucky’s supermarket and would try to go back to work at Kentucky Fried Chicken, where she once was employed, if her welfare checks stop coming.

Jose Bautista said that welfare checks have provided him and his wife an essential economic cushion when they can’t find work.

“We can usually survive off of minimum-wage jobs,” Bautista said. “But we both can’t find anything right now. And the only time that we have got on welfare was when we really needed it.”

Bautista and his wife came illegally from Mexico three years ago and have since had two children, who are U.S. citizens. “It isn’t true,” he said, “that immigrants come to the U.S. just so they can enjoy cushy lives on welfare. We have always tried to find work.”

Tara Harris is another recipient who agrees that some limitations are necessary.

On welfare herself for seven years, Harris said “there are a lot of folks using the money like they are not supposed to. They are abusing it--they shouldn’t be making welfare a living.”

Without the $479 welfare check and $80 in food stamps she receives every month, Harris added, she would be unable to care for her 9-year-old daughter.

But despite her dependence on the checks, Harris said it was time for her to change. “I’ll be proud when I can get off.”

Times staff writers Frank B. Williams and Nancy Hill-Holtzman contributed to this story.

* TOUGH DECISION: Clinton chooses welfare experiment over political peril. A16

* IN VENTURA COUNTY: Officials cautiously embrace national welfare proposal. B1

The Impact on L.A.

The landmark welfare reform bill that President Clinton has promised to sign threatens dire consequences for Los Angeles County, because it is by law the provider of last resort to people who have nowhere else to turn. Here are some preliminary estimates of the potential impact on recipients--and taxpayers.

OVERALL

California may lose more than $10 billion in federal aid for legal immigrants over the next six years, nearly half of that in L.A. County.

SSI BENEFITS

As many as 93,000 legal immigrants will become ineligible for Supplemental Security Income and may seek general relief from the county. Estimated cost: maximum of $236 million a year, nearly double the current cost.

FOOD STAMPS

Nearly 300,000 county residents could lose eligibility.

AFDC

If the state exercises its new authority to disqualify legal immigrants, about 200,000 families with children could lose benefits under Aid to Families With Dependent Children.

MEDI-CAL

Also depending on action by the state, legal immigrants could be denied Medi-Cal services. Estimated cost: Up to $100 million a year.

Source: Los Angeles County chief administrative office