With the start of the state’s legislative season, it’s time for lawmakers to get serious about ways to save money. So how about this &045; why not cut welfare benefits to recipients who don’t bother to speak English and sit around smoking all day?

If that sounds like a joke, wait for the punch line when the two bills &045; one on smoking, the other on mandated English &045; come up this session. The brainchild of Rep. Brad Finstad, R-New Ulm, the English-for-benefits plan would tighten existing state laws that already require immigrants to sign up for English classes or apply for U.S. citizenship within four years of becoming permanent residents if they want state assistance. Finstad would fast track that to put them in English classes within a year &045; or else.

On the smoking issue, another rep with an &uot;R&uot; after his name, Marty Seifert of Marshall, has the great idea to fine welfare recipients the cost of their cigarettes. Figuring out that a pack-a-day habit can cost $1,200 a year, Seifert points out that 40 percent of welfare recipients smoke and says the state shouldn’t be in the business of &uot;subsidizing bad habits.&uot;

But both proposals border on unworkable and, regarding the English-language requirement, unnecessary. English as a second language educators say they can’t keep up with the demand as it is, rendering Finstad’s suggestion of hordes of foreigners refusing to speak the language a misleading and dangerous stereotype.

As far as enforcement, officials could yank people out of welfare lines if they’re caught conversing in Icelandic and puffing on a Camel. But aside from that, just how would the language and smoking police operate? And what would they achieve other than inviting lawsuits or censure &045; even by the Bush administration? For proof of that, recall last year when the U.S. Department of Agriculture deep-sixed a Minnesota law that banned the use of food stamps to buy junk food.

If Seifert and Finstad deserve any credit, they do earn a nod for casting political correctness to the winds by renewing an always difficult discussion of welfare reform. The program, after all, is supposed to provide transitional assistance to get people on the road to self-sufficiency, and lawmakers on the DFL side of the aisle should take note that welfare reform is not a one-time initiative but a constantly evolving effort that allows for adjustments when some measures just don’t work.

But the impracticality of these two bills implies they’re really more about welfare-baiting than achieving true reform. There are serious economic issues to be tackled this session, and with a near evenly divided House a chance to forge coalitions to find solutions to them. The Legislature would be wise to avoid such foolish distractions to their work.

&045; Duluth News Tribune