Legislative Action Special Section                                                       

The need for more welfare reform is a continuing concern in Illinois. Lawmakers and activists across the spectrum say the state needs to pass laws that combine incentives to work with disincentives to stay on welfare.

The problem, as with much public policy, is the inability of decision-makers to come up with compromise solutions acceptable to all viewpoints. Welfare-oriented measures proposed this year evoked some strong, bitter feelings.

In their respective chambers, Sen. Frank Watson (R-55, Greenville) and Rep. Ron Stephens (R-110, Troy) introduced measures labeled by opponents as "anti-baby" efforts (which were proposed last year also, to no avail). They were put on hold until later this year or next year. Associated by many with conservative Republican philosophy, Watson's bill was cosponsored by three downstate Democrats in the House: Terry W. Deering (D-116, DuBois), Bill Ediey (D-95, Macomb) and John "Phil" Novak (D-85, Bradley).

The measures proposed that women receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) not be allotted more money after giving birth to an additional child. Supporters said this type of legislation would be a way to instill a sense of fiscal responsibility into would-be parents receiving public aid. "I think all states are wrestling with that concept," said Rep. William B. Black (R-l05, Danville). "It's the sense of people having to take some responsibility for what they do."

"This bill brings with it some very emotional arguments, and you have to be very careful when you argue it," he said. "Some people are opposed to family planning, period. But frankly, my wife and I have two [children] and at one time we'd talked about three or four. Well, we can't afford three or four when it comes to planning for their education [or] putting food on the table. It's the economic reality."

Opponents contend that such means would not achieve the ends sought. Doug Dobmeyer, executive director of the Public Welfare Coalition, said statistics show that the size of the average family receiving public assistance is dropping. "We don't see evidence that people would go through pregnancy and childbirth just to get a few extra dollars." He contends that the increase of $47 per month allowed when a family increases from two to three children does not even cover diapers, food and car fare. "The 'anti-baby' bill set in motion for next year a whole welfare agenda," he predicted. There are a number of other proposals that Dobmeyer believes will also resurface in the near future. One, introduced by Stephens, would require Medicaid recipients to pay the maximum $3 co-payment allowed by federal law. Dobmeyer said his group feels that even this low fee could inhibit people from using medical services. "It's a psychological barrier," he said.

He contends that the increase of $47 per month allowed when a family increases from two to three children does not even cover diapers, food and carfare

Rep. Peter Roskam (R-40, Wheaton) introduced a measure that would have offered $50-per-month AFDC grant increases to teen parents who stay in school and $50-per-month decreases to those who fail to maintain acceptable school attendance. Dobmeyer said that

August & September 1993/Illinois Issues/55

while he supports the incentive portion of this proposal, he opposes the "sanctions" it would place on young parents if they drop out of school. The bill was held in committee. Also held in committee was a measure that would have required families receiving public aid to have their children immunized. "On the surface it sounds good, but philosophically we oppose requiring things [of people]," said Dobmeyer. "We should use incentives to participate, not disincentives. And there are a variety of concerns from some people who think immunizations can be harmful, so this becomes a health issue."

After balking at $25-per-month grant increases in the state budget for AFDC recipients, Republicans consented to $10-per-month hikes that won't begin until April

After balking at $25-per-month grant increases in the state budget for AFDC recipients, Republicans consented to $10-per-month hikes that won't begin until April, affecting the last three months of the state budget fiscal year.

"We're in an era right now of poor-bashing, which means, 'Let's see how much new stuff we can heap on them . . . how many new standards they can meet when they're already trying to survive,'" Dobmeyer said.

Citing the governor's work-oriented initiatives set out in his January State of the State message, Dobmeyer said, "The Republican plan is more important [to that party] than grant increases. While these proposals are positive and good, they shouldn't be in place of grant increases because they're not going to move tremendous numbers of people [off welfare rolls] over a year because we don't have the jobs for them."

Many hailed the funding of several so-called "welfare-to-work" programs as a step forward. These included:

• The Homeless Families Support Project, providing financial incentives, medical coverage and day care services to homeless parents who find jobs.

• The Family Responsibility Project, which will circumvent regulations that now encourage families to break up in order to receive public assistance.

• The Income Budget Project, which allows AFDC clients to seek part-time or temporary employment without fear of losing benefits when the temporary employment ends.

• The Earned Income Disregard, which will allow families receiving AFDC to keep more of their income if family members find jobs.

"What we need are disincentives to stay on welfare coupled with incentives to go out and work," Black said. "Now we don't do it in a sensible way. If someone tries to work and goes out and gets a minimum wage job, they lose all public benefits . . . their medical card, everything.

"I think this is no longer the old Republican-Democrat issue. I think the fact that President Clinton has gone out and talked about people taking responsibility for themselves shows this. I've heard him say that if we do have universal health care, people are going to have to take responsibility for their own behaviors."

Black said that while a $25 AFDC increase, as proposed, would have been "rather modest," it would have angered several of his constituents who have had to take substantial pay reductions in order to keep jobs. "When they read of a $25 increase for AFDC, they don't understand. [Even so,] I don't advocate taking a dull ax and slicing welfare to the bone. I've seen people end up on welfare who worked all their lives. You can't make a generality that everybody on welfare is lazy and cheating."

Dobmeyer said much of what the state will do depends on what the Clinton administration does on the federal level. "The state now pays up to one year of transitional child care and medical [care] after a parent gets a job through Project Chance because the federal government is paying for it," Dobmeyer said. "Before, they paid for only six months. If the federal government says they're going to provide five years of coverage for child care and medical care, the state probably will do the same — and take credit for it." *

56/August & September 1993/Illinois Issues