Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, January 13, 1992 TAG: 9201130225
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
FOCUSING `VISION' ON CHILD POVERTY
WITH GOV. Wilder out of the presidential race, all that he brought to it should not be dismissed.Granted, most of what he contributed to the campaign was short on substance and specifics. He relied heavily on homily, slogan and vague assertion.
Wilder did, though, unveil one proposal - for ending childhood poverty - that deserves to remain in the national debate.
Children don't vote, so some observers may have wondered why he was spending so much time talking about them. His aides called it "a vision thing." In the waning days of his lackluster campaign, Wilder may have hoped it would draw attention to his candidacy. It didn't.
But he wasn't just kissing babies. This was a serious proposal (albeit, none of it original), and he explained how he thought it should be implemented. Among his recommendations:
Spending $44 billion, in the first year of the plan, on refundable tax credits for families with incomes up to $50,000. Families with incomes up to $10,000 would be eligible for a $1,000 tax credit for each child under 6, a credit of $750 for each child aged 6-17, and a $100 credit for each adult. The amount of the credit would be phased downward for families of higher income levels and eliminated for those earning over $50,000.
Spending $7 billion to fully fund Head Start for disadvantaged children and the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) nutritional program. Also, a threefold increase in funding for breast-cancer screening and prenatal-care programs and a doubling of appropriations for child-abuse prevention, immunization and bilingual education.
Wilder said he would pay for all this by cutting spending on defense, foreign aid, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the State Department, farm subsidies and production of nuclear materials. Additionally, he'd freeze Medicare reimbursement rates, repeal the salary cap for Medicare contributions and cut congressional spending.
The specifics of Wilder's spending proposals have been floating around Washington awhile, and are generally the currency of other presidential candidates and of such groups as the Children's Defense Fund. There was certainly enough in his package to make some people hiss and boo.
For instance: Do families earning $40,000 or $50,000 a year need any tax credits? Middle-class tax cuts are politically popular, but wouldn't do much either for the economy or the poor.
And aren't defense-budget savings supposed to be used to reduce the federal deficit? Let's not forget that today's children, including those the governor wants to lift out of poverty, will be paying off the debts we've incurred.
Such objections notwithstanding, Wilder's plan ought not to die an obscure death with his departure from the field. His "vision thing" is worth keeping alive - on two grounds.
In the first place, if you want to select a single problem on which to focus, what better choice than the plight and prospect of children?
In the past decade, child poverty in the United States grew by 26 percent - during a time when the Gross National Product also grew by more than one-fourth. It is not only unworthy that in America every fifth child (13.4 million) now grows up poor. It is also an alarming threat to the nation's future.
Everyone agrees preschool education and health programs are effective and save money down the road, yet they are extended to only a fraction of eligible children. Full funding for Head Start should be a done deal by now: President Bush promised it in 1988. His retreat from the promise deserves more attention.
The second notable thing about Wilder's proposal was its ambition. He didn't want simply to reduce child poverty. He proposed to eliminate it, and by the end of his first term no less.
In all likelihood, this would not have happened even had Wilder stayed in the race and been miraculously elected, of course. The phenomenon of poverty is not so easily uprooted. Tax credits won't do the job.
Still, what is a presidential campaign for, if not to put forward a vision - a goal to which the nation should aspire - backed up with specific plans and, if necessary, funding sources? Wilder's campaign, though it went nowhere, is more justifiable for his having entered this proposal into the debate.
America needs the equivalent of a man-on-the-moon aspiration. The threat to this country comes not only from the loss of a portion of our children. We betray our destiny, too, if we find such a loss acceptable, if we lose all confidence and purpose and will to correct injustices that are a drag on conscience and society.
The elimination of childhood poverty is a fine goal, which America could largely accomplish if we set our minds to it. Wilder is to be congratulated for having suggested that we should. The remaining presidential candidates could do worse than to promote the same priority.