These bills could make life a little easier for low-income Californians
https://www.elkgrovenews.net/2019/10/these-bills-could-make-life-little.html
An outreach worker for the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano helps a man fill out an application for CalFresh, the state's food stamp program. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters. | |
Lawmakers have passed a suite of bills that aim to ease financial
burdens for Californians living paycheck to paycheck.
While several new California laws have sparked national attention - such as the law that will convert gig economy workers into full employees and another to cap large rent increases - state legislators quietly approved dozens of
other bills that address challenges faced by California’s poor.
Among this year’s batch of anti-poverty bills, several tinker with
public assistance programs to make them easier to get and to use. Others aim to
protect people from financial catastrophes caused by crushing debt.
While Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed several into law, many still
await his yay or nay before Sunday, the final deadline of the legislative
session.
“We’re living in the wealthiest as well as the poorest state in
America,” Newsom said before signing a package of renter protection bills on
Tuesday. “And while we’ve made some progress on our poverty rate it’s still the
highest in the nation for one reason: cost of living.”
As usual, many of the more ambitious proposals never made it to
the governor’s desk. Take a bill that would have required counties to increase participation in CalFresh, California’s food stamp program, to 95% by
2024 - up from 72% at the state’s last count in 2017 - but was quietly snuffed
in the final weeks of the legislative session. In addition, a bill that would have made it difficult to tow the vehicles of
people who live in them failed. Cities, law enforcement agencies and real
estate lobbies opposed it.
This year’s budget negotiations also left some disappointments for
progressive lawmakers who were testing the limits of the governor’s ambitious
agenda and record budget surplus.
While Newsom’s budget more than doubled the size of the state’s tax credit for low-wage earners,
undocumented workers who file taxes were left out during final negotiations,
disappointing immigrant advocates. Likewise, lawmakers negotiated a budget deal
to expand free health insurance to low-income, undocumented young adults, but ultimately tabled a proposal to do the
same for undocumented seniors.
Here’s a roundup of some of the key bills that could make life
just a little easier for millions of low-income Californians. Think of these
bills as a bit like aspirin: they don’t get at the roots of poverty but they
could relieve some of the pain.
Check back at CalMatters.org for updates on our running tally leading
up to the Oct. 13 deadline.
Buying hot meals with food stamps
Two bills introduced by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a Democrat
from San Diego, would expand a program that allows some people who struggle to
cook to buy hot, prepared food using CalFresh dollars. The federal food stamps
program otherwise prohibits the purchase of hot meals. AB 942 would expand the program to all 58 counties, up from 10 that
have opted in thus far. AB 612 would allow community college campuses across the state to
participate in the program as well.
Who would benefit: CalFresh recipients who are seniors, disabled,
homeless or students at participating campuses.
Who would be hurt: These bills flew through the legislative
process with little opposition.
The governor signed the bills.
Making child support less “punitive”
Two bills aim to reform the state’s child support system, which
critics say disproportionately burdens low-income families. Currently, families with children who receive
public benefits such as CalWORKs or Medi-Cal only get $50 of child support each
month, while the rest goes to the government to pay for their public
assistance. SB 337, from Sen. Nancy Skinner, an Oakland Democrat, would
increase the amount that families on public assistance receive in monthly child
support payments. It also would forgive child support debt owed by some very
low-income parents. AB 1092 from Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Los Angeles
Democrat, would stop the state from charging 10% interest on unpaid child
support for children on public assistance.
Who would benefit: Families who use public assistance and receive
child support, as well as parents with growing child support debt.
Who would be hurt: The state’s coffers. Together the bills would
result in estimated revenue losses over $300 million annually, split between
the federal, state and local governments.
The governor vetoed the bills.
More savings for welfare recipients
As part of the budget deal signed by Newsom in June, lawmakers
increased the total savings that people can have while receiving CalWORKS,
California’s cash assistance program, from $2,250 to $10,000. Under the new
law, CalWORKS recipients also now can own vehicles with a value of up to
$25,000, up from $9,500. A more aggressive bill introduced by Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat,
would have done away with the asset limits altogether, but was gutted during
budget negotiations.
Who would benefit: Families with savings or vehicles above the old
limits who will now qualify for CalWORKS, as well as recipients who previously
kept their savings low to stay on the program.
Who would be hurt: Opponents argue that expanding eligibility for
public benefits programs like CalWORKS will allow families to enroll who don’t
need it.
Protecting the last $1,724 in your bank account
SB 616, introduced by Sen. Bob Wieckowski, a Fremont Democrat, requires
debt collectors to leave at least $1,724 in a person’s combined bank accounts.
While the bill does not forgive the debt or prohibit the collector from going
after debt by other means, such as garnishing paychecks, it does ensure that a
person’s bank account will be left with the minimum amount that a family of
four needs to survive for a month.
Who would benefit: People with debt, a bank account and limited
savings.
Who would be hurt: The debt collection industry, which has argued
that the limit is so high that it will effectively prohibit the practice of
collecting debt from bank accounts.
The governor signed the bill into law on Oct 7.
Fending off predatory lenders
AB 539 from Assemblywoman Monique Limón, a Santa Barbara Democrat,
places a maximum interest rate of roughly 38% on consumer loans between $2,500
and $10,000. It follows multiple failed bills from prior years that aimed to
regulate a growing industry of consumer lenders who often charge interest rates in the
triple digits. California joins 38 states that
have approved similar caps.
Who would benefit: Borrowers who resort to small loans with very
high-interest rates, often due to poor credit history.
Who would be hurt: Consumer lenders who specialize in these loans.
Groups including the Los Angeles Metro Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the
California Black Chamber of Commerce argued that the interest cap could shut
off access to credit for some borrowers.
Newsom signed the bill into law on Oct. 10.
Making Medi-Cal paperwork make sense
Introduced by Assemblyman Kansen Chu, a Milpitas Democrat, AB 318 would require the state Department of Health Care Services
to improve the readability and translations of 10 of the most important
Medi-Cal documents. The documents would be tested by focus groups of native
speakers and community-based organizations.
Who would benefit: People who have trouble understanding Medi-Cal
paperwork.
Who would be hurt: The Department of Finance has opposed the bill
due to possibly high costs of testing and translating materials. The bill
passed both houses on a partisan vote.
The governor has not yet signed or vetoed the bill.
Banning discrimination against Section 8 tenants
While current law prohibits landlords from discriminating against
tenants for reasons such as race and disability, SB 329 from Sen. Holly Mitchell, a Los Angeles Democrat, bans
landlords from rejecting tenants because they receive federal Section 8 housing
vouchers. A dozen other states have passed similar bans.
Who would benefit: People with Section 8 vouchers who struggle to find landlords who will consider them before their
vouchers expire.
Who would be hurt: Landlords who post ads that say “No Section 8”
could be sued by the state’s civil right’s department. Landlords argued they
would lose time and money if forced to consider Section 8 tenants.
Newsom signed the bill on Oct. 8, along with a package of tenant
protection bills that included California’s new cap on large rent increases.
Getting more children on CalFresh
AB 1377, introduced by Assemblywoman
Buffy Wicks, an Oakland Democrat, requires that the state and counties to
identify an estimated 940,000 children who are eligible for CalFresh but not yet enrolled, using
data collected across the free and reduced-price school meals program, Medi-Cal
and CalFresh.
Who would benefit: Children eligible for CalFresh, but not
currently receiving it.
Who would be hurt: The bill garnered nearly unanimous support in
both chambers of the legislature.
Newsom signed the bill into law on Oct 2.
Jackie Botts is a journalist at CalMatters
working for The California Divide, a collaboration among newsrooms examining
income inequity and economic survival in California.
CalMatters.org is
a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and
politics. Elk Grove News is a media partner of CalMatters.
Post a Comment