Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, March 26, 1994 TAG: 9403260078
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LESLIE TAYLOR STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Called "family caps," they have been condemned nationally by advocates for the poor, touted as just by proponents and said to have the Clinton administration torn in fashioning a national welfare reform plan.
In Virginia, similar rumblings could be heard recently from the floor of the General Assembly.
Supporters of the family cap argued that it was unfair to ask taxpayers to subsidize a welfare mother's decision to get pregnant again. And for women to give birth to children they could not support was just plain irresponsible.
Kay Coles James, secretary of health and human resources, said during her confirmation hearings earlier this year, that "in principle, we all agree that we don't want any incentives in the system that encourage people to have children they're not prepared to take care of."
But welfare reform legislation was opposed by some legislators, "basically because of the cap provision," said state Sen. W. Henry Maxwell, D-Newport News.
"It's punitive to children," Maxwell said. "Any time we could give a Disney project millions of dollars . . . we could do likewise for children who didn't desire to be born into this world," Maxwell said.
Virginia Sen. Yvonne Miller, D-Norfolk, was vocal in her opposition to the family cap during the last General Assembly session. Though welfare reform legislation has long passed both assembly houses and is awaiting Gov. George Allen's endorsement, Miller still has concerns about the provision.
"What it does is play to the stereotypes that welfare mothers feed on society," Miller said. "It's playing to people's preconceived ideas of Cadillac welfare mothers, which I think is cruel.
"We have made welfare mothers the scapegoats for problems in our society."
Kent Willis, director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Virginia, said one argument against the family cap is its infringement on reproductive freedom. By imposing such a rule on poor women, states infringe upon their right to reproduce, he said.
"One might argue that there is no constitutional requirement that we have welfare to start with," he said. "But if the government is going to implement a system, then they must apply it fairly and equally.
"You can say you're going to have speeding laws but you can't say you're only going to arrest women and racial minorities. Rules need to be applied fairly. You do not inhibit freedoms guaranteed by the constitution."
Virginia, which must obtain a federal waiver before it can implement its welfare reform program, is one of five states seeking federal permission to experiment with family caps. Georgia won approval last year.
New Jersey is the only state now denying benefits to women who give birth after going on welfare rolls. The New Jersey program - which is facing a legal challenge - is being closely watched by other states that are considering similar welfare-reform measures.
In a report released this week, claims that the family cap provision in the New Jersey program had led to a significant reduction in children born to families on welfare were called "widespread misconceptions created by premature and inaccurate assertions."
"States contemplating . . . child-exclusion laws on the basis of early announcements of success by New Jersey would be well-advised to await more reliable data before rushing to reform," said the report, written by a former New Jersey Human Services official.
The family cap component of Virginia's welfare reform program - called the Virginia Independence Program - would be limited to the first two of the program's three pilot years. Lt. Gov. Don Beyer said last week that the two-year pilot period would provide data needed to determine whether a family cap should become a meaningful part of the program.
"We have to do what we can to encourage people not to have children," James, state secretary of health and human resources, said Friday. "We'll see if it works. If it doesn't, so be it."
Del. Victor Thomas, D-Roanoke, said there must be some limitations placed on welfare recipients.
"Somebody's going to have to get the message that we want to try to get a family together but not with the idea of having more children to collect," he said. "It's got to have some flexibility, and I'm optimistic that it's going to work.
"But we've got to do something because they are too important to all of us."
Knight-Ridder Newspapers provided some information for this story.
by CNB