Welfare Bill Ready For A Vote, Clinton Panel Puts Finishing Touches On Legislation To Reverse Six Decades Of Social Policy

Describing their efforts as “a rescue mission” for generations of poor, congressional Republicans said Tuesday they have finished writing a bill that would reverse six decades of social welfare policy.

President Clinton continued to express ambivalence toward the legislation.

The bill would end the 61-year-old federal guarantee of cash assistance for the nation’s poorest children and would give states vast new power to run their own welfare and work programs with lump sums of federal money.

Republicans in both houses said they have enough votes to pass the plan; many Democrats said they would like to vote for it. But the Democrats said they did not know enough about the details on several important issues. Some Democrats said they were looking for guidance from the White House.

Clinton, who promised in 1992 to “end welfare as we know it,” has vetoed two earlier welfare bills on the ground that they were too harsh to children. Bob Dole, his likely opponent in this year’s presidential election, has repeatedly denounced those vetoes.

Republicans say they have addressed many of Clinton’s earlier concerns by adding money for child care and guaranteeing Medicaid for children.

Rep. E. Clay Shaw Jr., R-Fla., who wrote much of the bill, said Congress was undertaking a “rescue mission” to save millions of children from poverty and lives of dependence on welfare.

Opponents including churches and unions attacked the bill. John J. Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, said it was not only “bad for the country” but also “harmful to poor families.” Thus, he said, “I’m hopeful that the president has the compassion and courage to veto it.”

The final legislation was worked out by a team of negotiators from the House, which passed the bill by a vote of 256-170 on July 18, and the Senate, which approved its version, 74-24, on July 23. The House plans to take up the final version Wednesday, with the Senate to follow Thursday.

Rahm I. Emanuel, a White House aide who coordinates welfare policy for the president, said Tuesday night, “We are analyzing the agreement to see if Congress has made steps toward the president’s goals.” Other White House aides said Clinton might announce his position before Wednesday’s scheduled House vote.

Clinton was buffeted by cross-currents within the administration and even inside the White House. “War is going on in the White House,” an administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Tuesday night.

On the one hand, Clinton said Tuesday: “There are a lot of things in the bill I’d like to sign. I like the child care money. I like the increased child support enforcement.” On the other hand, he said, “I don’t want to see harm come to the children of this country.”

The Urban Institute, a research organization in Washington, has estimated that the bill would push 1.1 million additional children into poverty, though some White House officials discount those estimates.

Republicans said the final welfare bill would reduce projected federal spending by $55 billion over six years. Much of the projected savings would come through a $28 billion cut in spending for food stamps over six years. Legal immigrants not yet citizens would be banned from the food stamps program, congressional aides said. States would continue to provide Medicaid and school lunches to members of legal noncitizen families.

For current food stamp recipients, the level is about 80 cents per person per meal. By 2002, it would be 66 cents, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Clinton had objected to the depth of the food stamp cuts and the restrictions on benefits for legal immigrants in the current bill. It is unclear whether he will be satisfied with the handling of those issues in the final measure.

One Democrat, Rep. Sander M. Levin of Michigan, said Tuesday that the new bill was in many respects “a significant improvement over the bills that the president vetoed.”

Levin, who voted against the earlier welfare bills, said Tuesday night, “I’d like to hear from the president.”