New CBP Report: Congress Should Maintain States’ Flexibility To Expand SNAP Food Assistance

August 13, 2012

A new CBP analysis examines deep cuts that Congress is considering making to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps). Known as CalFresh in California, this program provides food assistance to nearly 4 million low-income individuals across the state, over three-fifths of them children. The need for food assistance has increased due to the Great Recession and its aftermath. Since mid-2007, when the economic downturn started in California, CalFresh enrollment has risen steadily and nearly doubled.

As part of the reauthorization of the federal Farm Bill, the US House of Representatives is considering slashing SNAP funding by more than $16 billion over the next 10 years, largely by eliminating the flexibility that states have to broaden SNAP eligibility to more low-income working families. This change would end SNAP food assistance for roughly 2 million to 3 million low-income individuals in 40 states, including California.

The cuts under consideration in the House would jeopardize improvements that California has made – or is considering making – to CalFresh. For instance: as we’ve blogged before, a bill now in the Legislature – AB 1560 – would bring more low-income individuals into CalFresh by both simplifying eligibility rules and creating a direct link between CalFresh and the Medi-Cal Program. The proposed House cuts to SNAP would prohibit this effort to expand access to CalFresh and would reduce nutrition assistance at the worst possible time: with many families still struggling in the wake of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

– Steven Bliss

Comments Off | Federal Budget & Taxes, Human Services & Child Care | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by cbporg

Our State Budget Is a Local Budget

July 18, 2012

A little-known fact about the $91.3 billion state General Fund budget that took effect on July 1 is that it’s primarily a local budget, with the vast majority of state dollars flowing to local communities.

More than 70 cents out of every state dollar goes toward “local assistance.” This includes support for public schools and community colleges, financial aid for low-income college students, and cash assistance and services for low-income seniors and people with disabilities. Local assistance funding also goes to doctors who provide health care through the Medi-Cal Program, which serves millions of low-income children, parents, and seniors.

The other big category of state spending – accounting for more than 25 cents out of every state dollar – is known as “state operations.” Much of this funding also flows to local communities, including support for the 33 campuses of the California State University and the University of California, 33 state prisons, veterans services, state parks, and environmental protection.

State dollars play an important role in strengthening local economies and creating a high quality of life. So all Californians have a stake in our state budget and in helping ensure that our state’s finances are on solid footing.

– Scott Graves

Comments Off | Corrections, Education, Health, Human Services & Child Care, State Budget | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by cbporg

Deep Cuts Contribute to Steep Drop in CalWORKs Enrollment

July 11, 2012

The fallout from recent years’ state budget cuts is evident across California – from larger class sizes to rising university fees to diminished support for low-income seniors and people with disabilities. Recent cuts also have taken a toll on CalWORKs, which provides cash assistance to low-income families along with welfare-to-work services to help parents find jobs and overcome barriers to employment. Nearly four out of five CalWORKs participants (78.7 percent) are children.

Despite a jobless rate that remains in double digits, the number of families enrolled in CalWORKs has tumbled sharply, with the caseload dropping by more than 25,000 (4.2 percent) from June 2011 to March 2012, the most recent month for which data are available. Some portion of this decline could be due to the modest improvement in California’s economy: The state’s unemployment rate fell from 11.9 percent in June 2011 to 11.0 percent in March 2012. Some CalWORKs parents may have moved into the workforce – and out of the CalWORKs Program – during that period.

But the suddenness of the caseload drop-off indicates that some other factor was at work. The culprit? The major reductions adopted as part of last year’s budget. The Legislature cut CalWORKs grants by 8 percent, significantly reduced the earnings limit to qualify for CalWORKs, and rolled back adults’ lifetime limit from 60 months to 48 months. Not surprisingly, all three of these changes took effect in July 2011 – just as CalWORKs enrollment began its steep downward trajectory. In fact, recent state estimates suggest that these cuts caused more than 10,000 families to lose CalWORKs eligibility during 2011-12, and those estimates may understate the actual impact.

We at the CBP often say that budgets reflect values and priorities. A key corollary: Budget cuts have consequences.

– Scott Graves

Comments Off | Human Services & Child Care, State Budget | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by cbporg

Bill To Boost CalFresh Participation Set for Hearing in State Senate

June 25, 2012

It’s no secret that California ranks dead last among states in enrolling eligible individuals in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which was formerly known as food stamps. The state has been chipping away at the problem for several years now, and the most recent effort – AB 1560 (Fuentes) – is working its way through the Legislature, with a hearing scheduled for tomorrow, June 26, in the Senate Human Services Committee at 1:30 p.m.

AB 1560 could help bring more low-income individuals into SNAP – known as CalFresh in California – by simplifying the eligibility rules for certain households and creating a direct link between CalFresh and Medi-Cal, which provides basic health coverage to more than 7 million low-income Californians. Specifically, the bill would raise the gross income limit applicable to CalFresh for families who have at least one person enrolled in Medi-Cal. For these families, the “gross income test” – which looks at a family’s total income – would be increased from 130 percent of the federal poverty line (currently $2,008 per month for a family of three) to 200 percent of the poverty line ($3,090 per month for a family of three), thereby removing a key obstacle to CalFresh participation for many low-income families. These families, however, would continue to be subject to a secondary income limit, known as the “net income test.” Families’ net income – that is, gross income minus certain allowable expenses, such as child care – would have to be at or below the poverty line ($1,545 per month for a family of three) in order to qualify for CalFresh food assistance.

Low-income working families who have a connection to Medi-Cal and who spend much of their incomes on child care and housing – leaving relatively little in their budgets for food – would benefit the most from this change. These families are currently excluded from CalFresh if their total incomes exceed 130 percent of the poverty line. For example, two parents who each work full-time at a minimum-wage job earn about $2,800 per month, putting their household income above the CalFresh income limit, but leaving their income well below 200 percent of the poverty line. Under AB 1560, this family would no longer be automatically excluded from CalFresh on the first pass – so long as at least one family member is enrolled in Medi-Cal. Instead, they would move right to the second test and, if their net income falls at or below the poverty line, would be eligible to receive CalFresh food assistance.

By establishing a direct link between CalFresh and Medi-Cal, AB 1560 also could help to boost CalFresh participation among the estimated 1.2 million Medi-Cal enrollees who are currently eligible for CalFresh, but either have not applied or have “fallen off” CalFresh due to excessive reporting requirements. Linking CalFresh and Medi-Cal also would eliminate duplicative steps for county eligibility workers, who assess eligibility for both CalFresh and Medi-Cal.

Boosting the number of low-income families who receive vital food assistance. Increasing efficiencies. Sounds like a win-win.

– Scott Graves

Comments Off | Human Services & Child Care | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by cbporg

Clearing Up Some Confusion About the Governor’s Proposed Tax Initiative

June 20, 2012

By now, many Californians are well aware that Governor Jerry Brown is seeking to qualify an initiative for the November ballot that would ask voters to temporarily boost sales and income taxes, with the increase primarily affecting the wealthiest Californians. What is less well known is that the Governor’s measure is also the keystone of the state’s effort to permanently transfer – or “realign” – several public safety, health, and human services programs, along with a dedicated source of funding, to the counties, a process that began last year. In particular, the Legislature redirected to counties two existing revenue streams – portions of the state sales tax and the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) – that are intended to flow to counties indefinitely in order cover the cost of the realigned programs. Counties, however, hoped for greater certainty than a change to state law can provide. The Governor’s initiative would address that concern by placing the revenue shift in the state Constitution, thereby guaranteeing that the sales tax and VLF dollars set aside for realignment will continue to flow for that purpose. The measure would also provide key legal protections for both the state and the counties as realignment rolls out, as we explain in our recent report.

Unfortunately, there appears to be some confusion about the relationship between the realignment provisions and the temporary taxes in the Governor’s measure. A recent post on Prop Zero, for example, claims that “much of the tax revenues [the Governor] would raise in his measure go to providing funding to locals for his realignment plans.” The post further argues that the Governor’s measure makes “the mistake of establishing a permanent change in governance … with temporary taxes.” This analysis is off the mark. As explained above, the Governor’s measure would place in the state Constitution the current, ongoing revenues that were already shifted to counties as part of last year’s realignment. In other words, the measure would combine a permanent change in governance with a permanent source of funding for counties’ new responsibilities. In contrast, the Governor’s proposed temporary tax increase has nothing to do with realignment. Instead, it would raise revenues in order to help balance the budget and stabilize the state’s fiscal situation.

In short, the Governor’s initiative encompasses two separate sets of revenues with different purposes and time frames – and never the twain shall meet.

– Scott Graves

Comments Off | Ballot Propositions, Human Services & Child Care, State Budget, State Taxes | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by cbporg

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 36 other followers