State Democrats Set Stage for Welfare Battle With Wilson

SACRAMENTO — Democratic leaders are set to unveil a welfare-to-work plan today that would provide community service jobs for welfare recipients and allow people to remain on aid much longer than Gov. Pete Wilson has proposed.

The unveiling of the Democratic plan sets the stage for a philosophical struggle with Wilson over how to treat people on public assistance.

The Democrats, facing a June deadline for devising their own plan for implementing welfare reform in California, have scheduled an early morning press conference to sketch out the broad outlines of their proposals on key points in the debate.

In large part, the proposals to be announced jointly by Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward) and Assembly Speaker Cruz Bustamante (D-Fresno) follow a plan put forth by the California State Assn. of Counties and the California Welfare Directors Assn.

The Democratic plan clashes directly with the Republican governor’s proposals on several significant issues, such as time limits for receiving aid, the creation of community service jobs and the handling of general assistance, the county-financed program that provides cash assistance to poor adults.

But it also resolves several of the concerns that counties, which administer welfare programs in California, had about Wilson’s plan, particularly time limits that were structured in a way that some officials feared would require recipients to repeatedly get on and off aid.

“We feel that this represents significant and substantial progress toward a solution,” said Sandy Harrison, Lockyer’s press secretary. “Although details are lacking, it’s an important framework and it’s appropriate to point out that Democrats have, in fact, made a great deal of progress.”

For weeks, lawmakers have held lengthy hearings to gather public testimony from every possible interest group--so many that Democratic leaders have come under criticism for not moving fast enough to fashion a legislative welfare plan.

By announcing the framework, Democrats hope to mute the criticism and encourage their own members to reach agreement on a final, detailed proposal.

The plan to be presented by Democratic leaders would:

* Vary the time limits for those on aid according to their individual needs. Those requiring substantial training to become job-ready would face a three-year limit while those requiring both training and substance abuse, domestic violence or mental health treatment would be permitted to remain on assistance for five years.

* If adults do not find jobs after two years of training or 2 1/2 years of training and treatment, they would be required to work in community service jobs specified by the counties. Typically, community service jobs range from clerical assistance to school or graffiti cleanup.

* Counties would be required to provide emergency assistance and upfront job search services to new applicants, in an effort to divert as many as possible from actually enrolling in the welfare system. The proposal mirrors a pilot program now underway in Los Angeles.

* New recipients would receive three months of provisional aid; for that period they would not be required to do anything except look for a job. If still not employed after three months, their needs would be evaluated and they would be channeled into a training or treatment program.

* After recipients have reached the five-year lifetime limit on their eligibility and still failed to find employment, the Democratic plan provides for a safety net but does not specify how it would be designed or what it would cost.

Sources said Democrats were leaning toward a proposal that would give counties the option of providing additional cash or non-cash aid, depending on what was most appropriate for the individual recipient.

* To provide financial relief to counties, the Democratic proposal calls for the state to assume responsibility for general assistance.

* Recipients would be required to enter into a contract with counties, in which they acknowledge that welfare is intended to be temporary and they promise to participate in training and treatment. The provision, sources said, could be used to cut off recipients who refuse to engage in training or fulfill their other obligations.

The Democratic plan differs sharply from Wilson’s proposals, particularly those that deal with time limits. Beginning in January 1998, Wilson’s plan would permit new applicants to receive assistance for only 12 months in a 24-month period. Those currently on assistance would be allowed to receive aid for 24 months in a 36-month period.

Under Wilson’s plan, after six months, recipients would see their cash grants cut by 15% if they failed to find work.

Wilson’s plan does not call for a state takeover of general assistance but it does allow counties the option to drop the program if they wish.

Nor does it provide community service jobs, although it does propose a non-cash safety net for families which reach the time limits. Under the governor’s plan, families would receive vouchers for goods and services, although they could no longer collect cash assistance.

But the Democratic proposal to provide upfront services to some applicants in an attempt to divert them from enrolling in the welfare system is an idea long advocated by Wilson.

A spokesman for Wilson said the Democrats had provided his office with the broad outlines of their plan but that the governor had not yet studied them closely.

“We have seen no details and we will refrain from commenting until we have them and have time to study them,” said Press Secretary Sean Walsh.

The announcement of the plan is the second attempt this week by Democrats to speed up their efforts to reach a consensus on welfare.

On Tuesday night, an Assembly and Senate conference committee, in its first vote on a major welfare issue, agreed that mothers with newborn babies should not be required to go to work until their child was at least a year old.

The vote was a flat rejection of Wilson’s proposal, which allowed new mothers only 12 weeks before they would be required to work but gave them more leeway if they could show they were unable to find child care.

Assemblywoman Valerie Brown (D-Kenwood) said California has such a shortage of licensed child care for infants that it would be unfair to require mothers to go to work so soon after the birth of their babies.

In many instances, she said the shortages were the result of state and local regulations which put so many restrictions on day-care facilities that most were discouraged from offering the service for infants.

* RIORDAN SEEKS CHANGES: Mayor urges reconsideration of federal law requiring cuts. B1

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Welfare Options At a Glance

On Thursday, Democratic state legislators will unveil a welfare-to-work plan that differs markedly from a plan proposed by Gov. Pete Wilson, setting the stage for debate over how the state will implement the new federal welfare requirements. Below is a comparison:

Issue: Lifetime limits

Federal Law: 5-years

The Governor: 5-years

Democrats: 5-years

****

Issue: Other limits

The Governor: 24 months in a 3-year period for current recipients; 12 months in a 2-year period for new applicants.

Democrats: 3-year limit for those requiring training, 5-year limit for those requiring training and substance abuse, domestic violence, mental health or other treatment.

****

Issue: Work Requirements

The Governor: 20-day upfront job search;single parents must be in approved job activity 32 hours a week.

Democrats: 3-month upfront job search; after 3 months must be in work training or their treatment assignment.

****

Issue: Safety Net

Federal Law: No safety net after 5 years.

The Governor: Non-cash grants to provide for children in family.

Democrats: County option to use cash or non-cash aid.