NEW YORK—As summer winds down and with back-to-school shopping just around the corner, some fear a change in welfare laws designed to encourage school attendance will only take money from poor people.

The state Senate extended "Social Service Law 131-Y" into the year 2005 in mid-July. Better known as "Learnfare," it was put forward by Gov. George Pataki in 1995 and will be effective statewide in September. Learnfare law applies to children in grades 1-6. It authorizes taking out $60-a-month from aid checks for three months, if a child misses four days in the three-month academic quarter. Parents will not be penalized if a note is sent to the school. A doctor’s note is not required, say school officials.

At first, the federal government put Learnfare on hold, saying an evaluation system was lacking—but national welfare reform legislation in 1996 gave New York a green light to move ahead without much public debate. Three New York City schools were picked to launch the first Learnfare pilot program in September 1997.

The $60 cutback is a per-child penalty which means if a parent has two children with more than four unexcused absences in one quarter the penalty doubles, according to the state’s Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance.

The money is refunded if the child’s attendance is perfect in the following academic quarter.

"Learnfare is about strengthening families and keeping children engaged in school so they can prepare for a future filled with hope and opportunity. Education is essential to breaking the cycle of dependency on public assistance. It is a simple message. Students belong in school," Gov. Pataki has asserted in the past.

"I welcome Learnfare," said Max Glover who has been principal at P.S. 178 in Brooklyn, N.Y., for seven years. "Our biggest problem is attendance. Parents give all kinds of excuses but they won’t put it in writing. Maybe if they do lose money, they will respond differently," he added.

David Ortiz, who led the agency responsible for implementing Learnfare during its three-year pilot program, said from September 1997 to January 1999 over 100 families had lost money due to failing to write a note. As of June 1999, the average number of families losing money was 10 per quarter, he said.

Critics say there is no proof Learnfare works and note that many families with low attendance are already under scrutiny for abuse or other problems in their homes.

"There is no analysis of this Learnfare program. This is one of the most ill-advised policies that the state has decided to enact," Assemblyman Roberto Ramirez, chairman of the assembly Social Service Committee told The Final Call in a telephone interview.

A state Senate legislative aide told The Final Call the possibility of "abusive situations—a backlash—against children because of the loss of money" was hotly debated by lawmakers.

But legislators feel the program works and have approved a measure requiring parents to attend counseling with the first three unexcused absences, the aide said.

The new counseling requirement is opposed by the N.Y. Association of the Bar, through its Committee on Social Welfare Law. "The Act changes will now require the same inadequate staff to counsel the parents in addition to their children. In fact, parental counseling should have taken priority from the onset. However, based on the current ratio of staff to students this modification seems destined for failure or, at best, mediocre results in an already undistinguished program," the Committee on Social Welfare Law argued in a letter to the Human Resources Agency, which administrates the Learnfare program.