The Rostrum

By H. BRENT DE LAND, Executive Secretary, Illinois Association of Community Action Agencies

Community action: 17 years of progress threatened

COMMUNITY action agencies began as the dream of John F. Kennedy and became reality during the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson. For 17 years they have played an important role in Illinois and in the nation. But the drastic changes being implemented by the Reagan administration may in one year destroy the programs that have aided millions of Americans over the past two decades. Programs such as Head Start, community action, community development, and other :ommunity based, self-help programs are being gutted or totally eliminated without any analysis of long-term v. hort-term gains. Among the various self-help programs, community action s the one program which is operated nd supervised by citizens of the local ammunity in which it operates.

Community action agencies have provided a multitude of significant services to the disadvantaged of our ountry. They have allowed senior citizens to eat nutritionally balanced meals in the company of friends. They have allowed preschool children from economically deprived backgrounds to gain the skills and self-assurance they need to succeed in school. Thousands of low-income wmes have been weatherized by crews from local community action agencies. Foster grandparents across the country have provided warmth ind friendship to children with serious emotional and physical problems. Hundreds of thousands of American infants have started life with a better chance because their mothers, both before and after the birth of their children, participated in a supplementary food program — Women, Infants and Children (WIC). That's what the antipoverty programs are all about: giving people a chance to develop their potential and to be participants in the American experience and aiding the stability of local economies. These goals were important in the '60s and '70s, but now many political leaders in Washington apparently do not believe in them. According to these "leaders," social programs have become "unaffordable experiments" which must be sacrificed to other natural priorities. In short, they say we can no longer afford them.

Another aspect of community action which is often overlooked is its economic impact within each state and community. For example, an analysis recently completed for the Illinois Association of Community Action Agencies indicates that community action agencies spent $205 million in Illinois during fiscal year 1981, and these funds, in turn, generated incomes of almost $780 million statewide.

I think, however, that we need to look more closely at what we cannot do without. Five years ago Philip Hart tried to point out the long-range economies of admittedly expensive (in the short-range) federal nutrition programs. In describing the WIC program, he said, "The child whose brain is damaged or whose growth is stunted because of a poor diet faces a life of dependency and poverty. If the moral considerations of taking every possible step to prevent such damage are not compelling enough, then cost-cutters should at least consider the cost to future generations in terms of lost earning capacities and, perhaps, public assistance." Cutting out the WIC program will mean that an increasing number of children, often of poor parents, will be born retarded and require institutionalization for the entire length of their lives. Will this "economy" help balance the budget? Cutbacks in nutrition programs may balance the budget by 1984, but what will the cost to society be in 2004?

It should be abundantly clear that investment in social programs like WIC is the best way to reduce federal expenditures 20 years from now. By the turn of the century the severe cuts in the social programs now proposed by the Reagan administraion will be recognized as a failure vying with the Vietnam War.

Americans must become aware of the effects of Reaganomics on the future of our nation before it is too late. Even leaders in the business community are beginning to question the sanity of the Reagan administration's budget cuts. For example, J. Richard Munro, president of Time, Inc., was quoted recently as saying: "Let's consider the economic effects [of the budget cuts in social service programs]. Remember that in a few years, the children of today will be our employees, adding, we hope, to our bottom line. Because of the end of the baby boom, there will be far fewer of them available. Budget cuts in training and education will worsen that problem."

The time is past when we can approach social programs from a simplistic budgetary perspective. In the name of scaling down the size of federal government, Reagan and his associates are destroying the structure of federalism which was initiated when Jefferson and Hamilton debated each other over 200 years ago. Until now, the essence of this debate has been honored.

What is needed is thoughtful leadership — leadership capable of reassuring the nation that the early principles of democracy will be honored. Thoughtful debate among Americans must be rekindled. Precipitious action, under the name of reform, is retrogression. We are sorely in need of progressive change. Cutting the heart out of our nation's social programs is not the place to begin. □

43/May 1982/ Illinois Issues