On the Docket: Changing the Budget Process

March 19, 2010

Here’s a State Capitol hearing worth marking on your calendar. On Monday, before the Senate and Assembly Select Committees on Improving State Government, the leaders of California Forward will present their proposals for modifying the budget process. Measures containing the proposed changes include ACA 4, SCA 19, AB 2591, and SB 844. Check our blog and/or website for the CBP’s forthcoming analyses of these proposals. Legislators are also expected to discuss a modest list of their own proposed in-house changes. The two-hour hearing will begin at 10 a.m. in room 4202.

– Lisa Gardiner

Bookmark and Share


Upping the Ante: Will Lawmakers Bet on Boosting Lottery Sales To Help Fund Public Schools?

March 16, 2010

Will devoting a larger share of lottery proceeds to prizes and a smaller share to education boost sales and thereby increase the number of dollars that go to schools? This question is central to a bill moving through the Legislature. Currently, the California State Lottery Act, passed by voters in 1984, divides proceeds among prizes (50 percent), administration (no more than 16 percent), and public education (at least 34 percent). AB 142 (Hayashi) would change the rules and establish a commission to determine the share of lottery sales allocated to schools and to prizes. Proponents argue that if a larger share of sales goes to prizes, lottery revenue will increase sufficiently to provide more money to schools than under current law. These claims may have merit, however previous CBP briefs on the lottery raise several important policy issues that still remain. For example, research shows increased lottery sales reduce state sales tax revenues. To the extent lottery ticket buyers spend less on taxable goods, the lottery would reduce sales tax revenues and thus the funds available for public education and other services.

Historically, lottery revenues have provided a very small share of public school funding. To change that fact would require the state to increase lottery revenues dramatically. By definition, however, increasing lottery revenues requires boosting the amount Californians spend on lottery tickets. Research also shows that individuals with lower incomes spend more on lottery tickets per capita than those with higher incomes. While some argue that individuals can choose whether to buy lottery tickets, others argue that it would be inappropriate for the state to transfer a larger share of the cost of public education to those who are least able to afford to pay.

Overall, while California clearly faces budget challenges this year, changing the rules to increase lottery sales continues to be an unwise bet.

– Jonathan Kaplan

Bookmark and Share


Nearly One-Quarter of Nonelderly Californians Lack Insurance

March 16, 2010

Nearly two million Californians lost health coverage in 2008 and 2009 as California’s employment rate dipped to its lowest level in more than three decades and workers faced the toughest job market in the post-World War II era, according to a report released today by the University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Health Policy Research. The new estimates show that 8.2 million individuals – nearly one in four of all nonelderly Californians – were uninsured for all or part of 2009, a significant jump since the last time the survey was conducted in 2007, just before the national recession took hold.

As the unemployment rate doubled, the share of adults with job-based health coverage all year declined sharply from 57.3 percent in 2007 to 51.3 percent in 2009, the report shows. Moreover, the share of children with coverage provided through their parents’ employer fell from 52.2 percent to 46.7 percent. Enrollment rose in the state’s public health programs – Medi-Cal and the Healthy Families Program (HFP) – to help fill the gap. In spite of higher participation in public programs, though, the number of uninsured children increased by 36.4 percent over the two-year period to 1.5 million children.

UCLA’s report is well-timed. Congress is completing its deliberations on national health reform, which would extend affordable coverage to more Americans. At the same time, the Legislature has begun deliberations on how California can bridge an $18.9 billion budget deficit and will consider Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposals to significantly reduce public health coverage programs, which are now helping to ensure that some of the newly uninsured can obtain care. The Governor’s proposals could add as many as 1 million children to the ranks of the uninsured if the HFP were eliminated. Reductions to Medi-Cal could send the number of uninsured even higher.

The proposed reductions come as public programs are experiencing rapid increases in enrollment. Enrollment in Medi-Cal, which provides coverage to low-income families, seniors, and the disabled, rose by 7.2 percent between May 2007 and May 2009. The HFP, which covers children above the poverty line up to 250 percent of the poverty line – $45,780 for a family of three – had also increased rapidly until July 2009, when enrollment was suspended for two months due to lack of state funds.

California’s economic recovery is expected to be long and slow and the unemployment rate is likely to remain relatively high for the next five years. That means fewer people will have coverage through their jobs and the need for these programs will continue to be greater – not less.

– Hanh Kim Quach

Bookmark and Share


On the Docket: Governor’s Budget Proposals and ARRA Spending

March 15, 2010

As promised, we’re combing the Senate and Assembly daily files for hearings that may be of interest to our blog audience. Here are a few within the next week at the State Capitol in Sacramento worth following:

On Wednesday, March 17, a joint hearing of the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee, the Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment, and Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 will examine American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) expenditures for workforce development. In particular, policymakers will examine an apparent lag in the spending of funds allocated to California’s workforce development programs. The hearing will be at 1:30 in Room 437.  For background, see the CBP’s report on what the ARRA has meant for California.

On Thursday at 9:30 in room 4203, the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 3 on Health and Human Services (affectionately known as “Sub 3”) will review the Governor’s proposed cuts to CalWORKs and IHSS, among other topics. For more about the Governor’s budget proposals, see our recent analysis. For more information about the increased demand for public programs such as CalWORKs during these tough economic times, see our report, Proposed Budget Cuts Come at a Time of Growing Need.

Not in Sacramento? You can listen to the hearings through the Assembly or Senate websites and may be able to follow all or some of the hearings on The California Channel.

– Lisa Gardiner

Bookmark and Share


Proposed Cuts to SSI/SSP and CAPI Would Affect Nearly 950,000 Californians

March 11, 2010

Two CBP fact sheets released today document the local impact of Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposed cuts to programs that help low-income seniors and people with disabilities meet basic living expenses. The Governor proposes to reduce SSI/SSP payments for individuals and eliminate the Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants (CAPI), which provides state-funded cash assistance to legal immigrants who are not eligible for SSI/SSP due to their immigration status. Our analyses – by county and legislative district – show that the Governor’s proposals would reduce or eliminate monthly assistance for nearly 950,000 vulnerable Californians by a total of $306.9 million between June 2010 and June 2011.

This isn’t the first time that these two key safety-net programs have been the target of budget-cutting efforts. Just last year, state policymakers cut the maximum SSI/SSP payment for individuals from $907 to $845 (6.8 percent) and the maximum payment for couples from $1,579 to $1,407 (10.9 percent). CAPI payments were also reduced because they are tied to SSI/SSP payment levels. The SSI/SSP payment for couples is now at the minimum level required by federal law and cannot be cut further, which is why the Governor’s current SSI/SSP proposal only targets payments to individuals.

– Scott Graves and Raul Macias

Bookmark and Share


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.