P\o7 roposition 187 proposes action in several major areas: education, health, social services and law enforcement. Following is a summary of how the measure would impact each area and arguments for and against its passage. \f7

SCHOOLS

* WHAT IT DOES

Proposition 187 requires educational administrators to verify the legal status of each child--and their parents--enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools. Children who cannot prove they are citizens or lawfully admitted immigrants would be barred from school after a 90-day period. School administrators would also be required to forward the names of suspected illegal immigrant children and parents to the INS, the state attorney general and state superintendent of public instruction.

Estimates by various authorities have placed the number of students statewide who could be expelled as a result of this provision at between 300,000 and 400,000. The annual savings for excluding 300,000 students could amount to $1.2 billion annually. However, passage of Proposition 187 would put at risk $2.3 billion in annual federal education funding because the reporting of suspected illegal immigrants appears to violate the provisions of a federal educational privacy act, according to the state legislative analyst.

Unlike other provisions of the ballot measure, which would take effect immediately upon passage, verification of the legal status of children enrolling in school for the first time would begin Jan. 1, 1995. By Jan. 1, 1996, the status of current students and their parents would have to be checked.

Both sides agree that passage of Proposition 187 would result in a legal challenge. In order for this component of the law to take effect, the U.S. Supreme Court would have to ignore or reverse its decision in the 1982 Plyler vs. Doe case, which made it unconstitutional to deny public education to undocumented school-age children.

The proposition includes a clause, common in statewide initiatives, saying that if any portion of the measure is held invalid, other portions would remain in effect.

* ARGUMENTS FOR

Sponsors say that by reducing the number of students in schools across California, classroom overcrowding and educational costs would be significantly reduced.

The state's student-to-teacher ratio could be decreased, costly bilingual programs could be reduced and the quality of education could be improved for students who are legal residents.