Inquirer Editorial: Welfare cuts: Wrong to target most vulnerable

There is plenty not to like in Gov. Corbett's proposed $27.1 billion budget plan, but his disregard for the state's most needy tops the list.

Children would lose Medicaid benefits and thousands of adults would be tossed off General Assistance rolls, including the disabled, recovering drug addicts, and battered women.

For the second year, Corbett held firm on his pledge to avoid tax increases by making drastic cuts to balance the budget. His proposed "lean and demanding" budget targets two of the costliest state departments - Education and Public Welfare. Corbett's efforts to be fiscally responsible are commendable. He has difficult choices to make. But his priorities when it comes to where to cut are downright disturbing.

By targeting the poor, he risks exacerbating conditions rooted in poverty that in the long run will end up costing the state even more money to correct.

Corbett proposes eliminating the $300 million General Assistance program, which provides only a subsistence benefit to the most vulnerable residents, roughly $180 a month in most counties. About 60,000 Pennsylvanians receive this assistance, which serves as a lifeline for the very poor who are temporarily disabled, victims of domestic violence, or caring for an elderly parent.

The governor says he wants to "right-size" welfare, and he suggests that the system has been abused by people who should be steered from the public coffers.

But there is no evidence of the General Assistance program's being misused. Even with more people out of work due to the economy, less than 0.5 percent of Pennsylvanians receive General Assistance dollars. Eliminating the safety net will save an estimated $150 million annually. But the cuts will likely send the poor to already overwhelmed churches, shelters, and community agencies struggling to meet growing demands.

Corbett's proposal to overhaul how the state distributes social-service funds also could have dire consequences. He would give counties more flexibility to make spending decisions. But that control would come with a hefty price tag - block grants that amount to a 20 percent cut in total funding.

The impact in Philadelphia alone could be as much as $42 million in cuts for critically needed mental health and homeless services. Homeless advocate Sister Mary Scullion said such a cut would represent a major setback for a promising effort to end street homelessness in the city.

Pennsylvania should balance its budget, but not on the backs of its most vulnerable citizens. Lawmakers should work with Corbett to find ways to lessen the harm.